Hi-Point Firearms Forums banner
1 - 20 of 39 Posts

·
Powered by air
Joined
·
926 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I've read far too many posts of people concerned about the legal ramifications of reloading their own HD/SD rounds. Can someone explain to me the justification for this. Also, please clarify if these issues affect criminal prosecution rather than civil tort. If anything, the fact this is even an issue seems to validate the US legal system is broken.

Can anyone provide a reference which sets legal precedence that custom loads or handguns with calibres larger than what the local police use expose one to additional liability. And if this exposes one to additional liability then why doesn't high capacity clips also expose one to equal, if not more liability given that frequently clips are emptied in these high stress situations - including by law enforcement. Wouldn't that also create an environment of excessive force?

For example, let's say I reload 9mm. Now, let us say I created a really hot 9mm HP and I wind up defending my self and now I'm being sued. Even a really hot 9mm HP is mathematically inferior to a quality .40S&W HD/SD HP round. Doesn't that mean everyone that uses a .40S&W HD/SD HP round is now in financial jeopardy, should they need to defend themselves?

Okay, let's say the .40S&W is considered to be legally acceptable line then why would a reloaded 9mm ever be an issue. What about those that carry .45s? What about those that use a shotgun? Somehow in the back of my head I imagine statements in a court room sounding something like this.

Lawyer to gunshot scumbag survivor: When you broke into the defendant's house, did you think you would get shot?

scumbag: No. I thought it was a possibility but unlikely.

Lawyer: So you thought you could be killed?

scumbag: Sure. Breaking in a house is dangerous.

Laywer: So you thought you might get killed but you didn't expect you would be extra killed?

scumbag: Of course not. I expected only to be killed once. Not twice! That's inhuman!

Lawyer: There you have it ladies and gentlemen of the jury. He only expected to be killed once, not twice! Despite the fact he wasn't killed, only paralyzed, surely you can understand the premeditated measures the defendant went through to ensure this out come. Had he only used a larger caliber weapon or a more lethal factory SD/HD round, my client would be dead today rather than suffering every day, paralyzed.

Laywer: And so, because my client broken into the defendant's house, attacked the defendant, whereby he defended himself and did not kill my client, my client deserves significant damages. Had he only used a larger calibre, we would not be here today.

Ya, pretty silly stuff. Seems to me, it boils down to either having a really bad lawyer or anti-gun judge. Perhaps I'm out of context? Perhaps the issue at hand is innocent bystanders being hit? Then how does that differ from the use of proven people killers like HSTs? I just don't get it. Where does one draw the line?

Would you/have you carried a reload for SD/HD?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,861 Posts
Does not involve home made HD/SD rounds but I have a wealthy female friend that was robbed, she shot the perp through her jacket with a revolver and emptied it, he was badly injured and later died. She was sued by the victims family, it happens and she did settle out of court for an undisclosed amount. Doesn't matter if the criminal is robbing you or not you can be sued if you defend yourself and the criminals lawyers can and will try to use anything they can against you, and a jury may not have the firearms knowledge to know that your home-made killer bullets are no more deadly than store bought ones :wink:
 

·
Powered by air
Joined
·
926 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
I'm guessing that was in the NE or in California?

I'd love to know why such suites are not immediately tossed out as frivolous. Was this before the "court reform" laws were passed?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,917 Posts
If you reload your own SD rounds and you get put on trial for it, IF the prosecutor finds out *and its possible if not probable they will* they will try to crucify you for loading a bullet that causes more damage etc, and is designed to cause undue pain and/or suffering to the "victim". They don't have to prove that you did, but you would be forced to try to disprove it. Regardless, I wouldn't want to try to convince a jury that I reload cuz I can't afford to buy bullets, then they would go through your financial records and parade that in front of the public too.

Dude, just buy some Jacketed Hollow Points and use those as your carry ammo. It's much less trouble.
 
G

·
Although I am not an advocate of "murder" if your state has anything like what is commonly referred to as a "Castle Doctrine" your best defense will go a lot farther if the perp is dead when the police/ambulance arrives. There are two reasons why this would be the better idea, the first is, if you were "in fear of your life" then deadly force is warranted, thus you had to remove the "fear" from your particular environment. The perpetrator had placed you in mortal fear. The factor of reloads, or factory hollow-points, with deadly fear as your motivation, should never even be under scrutiny.
The second reason, may come across as somewhat legalistic, but if they, the perpetrator, or perpetrators, have been reduced by your self-defense efforts, to no longer a "threat to your life" then rather than them being the attackers, now they are the "victims" of an aggressive home owner that was far too over-reactive to the perpetrators "less than life-threatening" burglary, or whatever crime was part of their plan to violate your personal space. Thus you become the "avenging person."
To see some of the self-defense stands go to http://www.nraila.org/ArmedCitizen/ and put your state to see the results of self-defense stories in your particular state. Get yourself educated on your own particular states self-defense cases. I have a friend that was a judge in South Carolina, and his comments, far and away, were that in the case of lethal force being used in any self-defense, was almost without question, aquitted, especially in the case of lethality of defense. I also want to state again that I AM NOT ADVOCATING MURDER, lethal self-defense ONLY. If you are not in fear, mortal fear, of your life, there is not justification for deadly force.

Doc
 

·
U.S.S.
Joined
·
2,267 Posts
The ramifications would most likely be civil rather than criminal in nature. You never know though, see the case of Harold Fish here in AZ. Using commercial rather than homegrown SD rounds is about not giving the lawyers ammunition, so to speak, to use against you. This was something that was stressed in my CCW class. Make sure you can defend your choice of firearm, and choice of ammunition.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
19,454 Posts
if it ever was an issue i would simply state: "i made my own load that i could safely use to defend myself against an attacker while minimizing risk to others in the immediate area and downrange. this was why i chose to reload with X bullet."

SW
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,757 Posts
Although I am not an advocate of "murder" if your state has anything like what is commonly referred to as a "Castle Doctrine" your best defense will go a lot farther if the perp is dead when the police/ambulance arrives. There are two reasons why this would be the better idea, the first is, if you were "in fear of your life" then deadly force is warranted, thus you had to remove the "fear" from your particular environment. The perpetrator had placed you in mortal fear. The factor of reloads, or factory hollow-points, with deadly fear as your motivation, should never even be under scrutiny.
The second reason, may come across as somewhat legalistic, but if they, the perpetrator, or perpetrators, have been reduced by your self-defense efforts, to no longer a "threat to your life" then rather than them being the attackers, now they are the "victims" of an aggressive home owner that was far too over-reactive to the perpetrators "less than life-threatening" burglary, or whatever crime was part of their plan to violate your personal space. Thus you become the "avenging person."
To see some of the self-defense stands go to http://www.nraila.org/ArmedCitizen/ and put your state to see the results of self-defense stories in your particular state. Get yourself educated on your own particular states self-defense cases. I have a friend that was a judge in South Carolina, and his comments, far and away, were that in the case of lethal force being used in any self-defense, was almost without question, aquitted, especially in the case of lethality of defense. I also want to state again that I AM NOT ADVOCATING MURDER, lethal self-defense ONLY. If you are not in fear, mortal fear, of your life, there is not justification for deadly force.

Doc
under missouri's stautes, a home invader has zero legal recourse.
 
G

·
The ramifications are that when the bastard perps family sues you in civil court, their lawyer gets to ask you 'So, you made your own own ammunition with total-metal-encapsulated-expanding-hollow-point rounds and specific powder, designed to KILL PEOPLE!'. To which you can either say, yes, or yes. And if you try to explain, he yells objection, the judge says upheld, and the jury has already decided that you were probably behind 9/11 and the collapse of the market.

Tort law = Getting paid without having to prove that anyone did anything at anytime.
 

·
Powered by air
Joined
·
926 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
Much of this I've heard before. Not to be disrespectful, but much of this appears to be parroting and hysteria. Does anyone have any links they can reference.

I take it Ohio doesn't have a castle doctrine?

As a side note, no one here is advocating outright murder.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
19,454 Posts
south dakota doesnt have a castle law either but the majority of folks around these parts have enough common sense to know if you shoot someone they have a good chance of dieing regardless of what they were shot with. we also have enough brains to know if someone is in your home commiting a crime is is your right to defend your home. castle law in every form buyt name.

SW
 

·
U.S.S.
Joined
·
2,267 Posts
Castle doctrine applies to the criminal side of things. You can be found within your rights, or acquitted, criminally, but still lose a civil case; see OJ Simpson. You may very well be able to defend your home loads in a court, but it is much easier to defend if you are using commercially available SD rounds.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,861 Posts
The case I am referring to was not a home invasion and therefore castle doctrine does not apply regardless if Ohio has it or not, and it does now.

http://eddiebear.wordpress.com/2008/06/01/the-castle-doctrine-comes-to-ohio/

"Commonly called the “Castle Doctrine,†the bill shifts the burden away from the apparent victim to prosecutors and police to prove that an individual did not act in self-defense. The bill specifies that the legal resident does not have a duty to retreat when someone is illegally entering or attempting to enter his home or car.

“A lot of people believe that’s the current law, that you have the ability to protect you and your family in your house,†Mr. Buehrer said. “They are shocked to find out that’s not the case. The general law in Ohio is if you’re attacked, you have a duty to retreat. The courts have recognized that if you’re in your home, you don’t have a duty to retreat, but we’re only one prosecutor or one judge away from losing that right in case lw in Ohio.â€
 
G

·
Here, in SC, we have the Castle Doctrine, if you are in your home, and there is a feeling of threat, you are justified in deadly force, there is no requirement for retreat, in a place of business, the requirement is for retreat to a "place of safety." For example, in a bank, once you are behind bullet proof glass, then you are, at that point in time, retreated to a place of safety. When John Doe Bad Guy, comes around that glass safety, if there is no further ability for safe retreat, then lethal force is permitted, you are completely justified in sending him to meet His maker.
This website http://www.scfirearms.org/ is one of our proponents here in SC for current information on upcoming and current laws and regulations. There are links to other states reciprocity laws, most of them will give links to the other state's 2A advocates. Again, every state will have their own pro-gun supporter websites, we need to be pro-active in our defense of our rights, or we will fall by the opponents of our constitutional rights. There is also the www.rkba.org for perusal.

Doc
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,159 Posts
I have yet to hear of a proven case where a home made round was used against the home owner. Are there any case links that someone could provide for me?

For the record, I use store bought ammo for defense.
 

·
Powered by air
Joined
·
926 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
Castle doctrine applies to the criminal side of things.
Yes, but criminal law often establishes social standard which is often a requirement in some form or fashion. In other words, what would the community at large be expected to do.

Additionally, criminal and civil cases have different standards. It's not uncommon to have jury members make statements like, "I think he did it but the evidence wasn't enough to establish beyond a reasonable doubt." In civil cases, if your Uncle's brother's friend simply new a guy, it may be enough to win if the situation is ripe. Because of the different standards required to win a case, it is not black and white. Likewise, the details of OJ's case makes a bad example given that he was not guilty simply because he was black - per jury member admissions. Such social statements were not attempted in the civil case.

With that out of the way, perhaps a reference establishing the point of origin from which such legal advice was given? I'm asking because at this point in time, this sounds like an urban legend; perhaps not completely without merit, but an urban legend nonetheless.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,861 Posts
I think the point is that regardless of home made or not you can be civilly sued by an offender (other than those cases that fall under castle doctrine) regardless of what ammo you use, so why add "ammunition" to the criminal?

I have yet to hear of a proven case where a home made round was used against the home owner. Are there any case links that someone could provide for me?

For the record, I use store bought ammo for defense.
But here you go anyways.

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-143625757.html
http://www.calccw.com/Forums/carry-guns-ammo/2756-carry-ammo-reload-factory-4.html
 

·
U.S.S.
Joined
·
2,267 Posts
Additionally, criminal and civil cases have different standards.
Exactly, that is what I am talking about. Homegrown ammo might not get you any additional criminal liability, but civilly, it can be spun so that you come out looking like the bad guy. The fact that you shot him is indisputable, but did you cause undue suffering because of how you chose to load your rounds? Yes you had a right to defend yourself, but you went overboard when you loaded your rounds to go 1200 fps, when standard SD rounds only go 1000 fps. Why would you load hotter when the standard rounds have been proven to be sufficient to stop an attacker? You must have done it with the intention of killing or causing undue suffering. If you did it with the intention to kill, then it is 1st degree murder. Once you make the intention of shooting your firearm killing the perp, instead of stopping the attack, it is murder; even if you make that decision right before pulling the trigger.
 
1 - 20 of 39 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top