Defensive Ammo

[Miroku]

Hey folks!
I recently got my pistol permit, and ordered a Springfield TRP. As my apartment has narrow corridors, I intend to use it as a home defense gun. Even though I've got to wait on the gun I picked up some Hornady TAP ammo just to have something around the house until I've had the time to test different rounds. That said, this 1911 will be my first pistol and I'm not knowledgeable enough yet on the topic to know what qualities make up a good defense round. Any advice?

[Oscar 319]

Start by reading the stickys here.

https://www.m4carbine.net/forumdisplay.php?f=91

[matemike]

PRACTICE!!!

Speer Lawman


PRACTICE!!!

[Iraqgunz]

How did you find that information?


Start by reading the stickys here.

https://www.m4carbine.net/forumdisplay.php?f=91

[Radioflyer]

I run Federal HST through all my pistols in 230gr for my 45s. My second choice is Speer Gold Dot.

This site was the deal-maker for me:
http://www.btfh.net/shoot/bullet-test-7.html

[Jake'sDad]

This site was the deal-maker for me:
http://www.btfh.net/shoot/bullet-test-7.html

It must be difficult to acquire enough wet phone books to do that kind of testing....

[ryanschmidt65]

Federal HST's or gold Dots will work just fine :)

[Sheepdog Tactical Gear]

Federal HST's or gold Dots will work just fine :)

Winchester Ranger is also excellent ammo, I have all of the above to run in my pistols.

Also you may want to find out what your local police department carries, it's easier to defend in court, should you ever have to actually use them.

[Iraqgunz]

Please do not post stupid gun rag stuff like that. You could use nuclear tipped .45 rounds if they were available. A bad shooting is a bad shooting- that's it.


Winchester Ranger is also excellent ammo, I have all of the above to run in my pistols.

Also you may want to find out what your local police department carries, it's easier to defend in court, should you ever have to actually use them.

[Jake'sDad]

Non plus p, 230 gr .45 jhp ammo does not expand well, if at all in animals.

Have you ever seen Federal P45HST2 shot? It expands quite well.

[slustan]

because he held stock in CorBon Ammo company and recommended Cor Bon as the best factory ammo. Non plus p, 230 gr .45 jhp ammo does not expand well, if at all in animals. The Black talon was the worst performer of all, due to its overly thick, stiff jacket material.

If you look in the terminal ballistics forum Dr. Gary Roberts has a list posted of suitable ammunition for carry. If you look at said list there are numerous non +P 230 grains JHP rounds that perform quite admirably.

[Jake'sDad]

I think we may have been wasting out time....

[Sheepdog Tactical Gear]

Please do not post stupid gun rag stuff like that. You could use nuclear tipped .45 rounds if they were available. A bad shooting is a bad shooting- that's it.

Clearly you've not been in court very much...but anyone who is contemplating the possibility of having to defend themselves with lethal force may want to consider more than simply terminal performance when choosing ammo.

When I said defend your choice of ammo, I didn't say or mean defend your bad shooting, I know personally literally dozens of my fellow LEOs who have had to defend themselves in court after a GOOD shooting...do you really think the thugs family isn't going to sue you because you were in the right...especially when they look and see you have a few assets they can get...

And when an over zealous ambulance chasing lawyer is questioning your choice of ammo in the law suit that WILL follow ANY shooting, even a GOOD one...ESPECIALLY if the suspect is dead, being able to defend your choice in ammo by saying it's also what local law enforcement uses in your area is a great way to defuse the situation, plays much better in front of a jury than this guy on m4carbine said this ammo expands really well.

[shua713]

winchester PDX1 can be found at any wal mart, cycle well and can be had for about a buck a round :cool:

[sammage]

And when an over zealous ambulance chasing lawyer is questioning your choice of ammo in the law suit that WILL follow ANY shooting, even a GOOD one...ESPECIALLY if the suspect is dead, being able to defend your choice in ammo by saying it's also what local law enforcement uses in your area is a great way to defuse the situation, plays much better in front of a jury than this guy on m4carbine said this ammo expands really well.

Many states have laws on the books that protect you from civil suit if you are not convicted of a wrongful shooting, FYI.

[Jake'sDad]

Clearly you've not been in court very much...but anyone who is contemplating the possibility of having to defend themselves with lethal force may want to consider more than simply terminal performance when choosing ammo.

When I said defend your choice of ammo, I didn't say or mean defend your bad shooting, I know personally literally dozens of my fellow LEOs who have had to defend themselves in court after a GOOD shooting...do you really think the thugs family isn't going to sue you because you were in the right...especially when they look and see you have a few assets they can get...

And when an over zealous ambulance chasing lawyer is questioning your choice of ammo in the law suit that WILL follow ANY shooting, even a GOOD one...ESPECIALLY if the suspect is dead, being able to defend your choice in ammo by saying it's also what local law enforcement uses in your area is a great way to defuse the situation, plays much better in front of a jury than this guy on m4carbine said this ammo expands really well.

Can you cite any cases where a defendant's choice of ammo contributed to a judgement against them?

I'm personally aware of attorney's asking what ammunition was used in a shooting, and whether it was department issued, (they asked me about everything...), but I've not heard of ammunition used being a factor in any civil case. One of the guys I worked with had a shooting where he used three types of ammo, only one being a department issued duty round, (1 reload, 1 ball round), and the only thing it resulted in, was jokes and derision from his squadmates.

I'm not arguing the wisdom of the concept, but I believe what gets folks riled up, is treating theory as if it were case law, without citation.

[Sheepdog Tactical Gear]

Can you cite any cases where a defendant's choice of ammo contributed to a judgement against them?

I'm personally aware of attorney's asking what ammunition was used in a shooting, and whether it was department issued, (they asked me about everything...), but I've not heard of ammunition used being a factor in any civil case. One of the guys I worked with had a shooting where he used three types of ammo, only one being a department issued duty round, (1 reload, 1 ball round), and the only thing it resulted in, was jokes and derision from his squadmates.

I'm not arguing the wisdom of the concept, but I believe what gets folks riled up, is treating theory as if it were case law, without citation.

Respectfully I never said it was case law, and off the top of my head I can't give you a specific case. I have read plenty of cases where homeowners have been sued after shooting home invaders…I don’t think it would happen in my state, but it does happen…and if one is out and about he won’t have castle law to stand on.

Now what I have seen personally is attorneys suing for any reason and then doing everything in their power to paint the defendant in the worst light possible.

We had an officer one jurisdiction over from mine get sued civilly after shooting a suspect even after he was cleared by his agency, and by state. On top of being cleared criminally and procedurally from state and his agency, he had no discipline issues in his jacket, and there was also dash cam video of the offender running in front of his cruiser with a handgun in his hand...and the offender had a very lengthy criminal record...officer still got sued...and had to defend himself in court.

After everything settles out the thugs family always starts crying Johnny was such a good boy he never did anything wrong…and the law suits begin.

Never underestimate how low that an ambulance chaser will go to in order to get paid.

I've carried Speer Gold dot, Winchester Ranger, and Remington Golden Saber, and Federal Hydro shock on the job, so I tend to stick with one of those in my carry gun, not only because of the performance of said rounds but also because should I have to shoot someone with them they've been cleared by the attorney with my agency so that's one less thing an lawyer can second guess me on, that is all that I am saying.

[Jake'sDad]

Respectfully I never said it was case law, and off the top of my head I can't give you a specific case. I have read plenty of cases where homeowners have been sued after shooting home invaders…I don’t think it would happen in my state, but it does happen…and if one is out and about he won’t have castle law to stand on.

What your suggesting about ammunition choice has been covered by many of the "famous gunwriters". But since no one can ever seem to point to a case where it actually happened, don't be surprised that some dismiss it as FUD.

And a little advice... unlike a lot of other sites, this one is frequented by tons of folks that have "been there and done that", so when you postulate, be prepared to back it up with something.

And for the record, I personally wouldn't carry reloads, a personally owned full auto, or exploding bullets for self defense, but I don't think any normal commercial loading of ammunition is going to give an attorney much to sink their teeth into.

[JSantoro]

I have read plenty of cases...

...which you are conspicuously not citing, while still trying to build your own case.

The local-agency-ammo advice is only good in instances where the local agency's duty ammo wasn't selected by some Poindexter bean-counter with a French Rennaissance Literature degree throwing a dart at a Midway USA catalogue turned to a hollow-point ammo section and authorizing the purchase of the cheapest thing within .5" of his POI.

You appear to be somehow reading IGs instructions to you as asking you to stop this nonsense.

I read the same thing you read and noted that, as it wasn't preceded with a "Will you please...," or anything of the sort, it was in fact a directive and not a request.

[Sheepdog Tactical Gear]

...which you are conspicuously not citing, while still trying to build your own case.

So you don't believe home owners who shoot intruders get sued...are you serious?

Most recent case I read, here, http://law.justia.com/cases/wisconsin/court-of-appeals/2009/36554.html

and in Park vs D'Amico, http://www.buffalonews.com/city/article313145.ece

In Park vs D'Amico, the suit alleges the killing was "malicious" want to bet if the home owner was using hollow points the plaintiff’s lawyer will try to point out the fact that hollow points cause more damage...and are not allowed to be used by the regular US military forces because they violate the Geneva convention...I'm not saying I agree with that nonsense but lawyers will argue anything to try to get paid.

Then as much as I dislike the Post there's this one...which is probably a little better example in the context of this discussion.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/regional/item_ALJSwzpPVzIJgQ7htiXDaP;jsessionid=9603843977D28F1848BA102DB2055A67

I've read quite a few more over the years, but these are just a few...and as we're becoming a more litigious society every day I expect this trend to get worse not better.


...
The local-agency-ammo advice is only good in instances where the local agency's duty ammo wasn't selected by some Poindexter bean-counter with a French Rennaissance Literature degree throwing a dart at a Midway USA catalogue turned to a hollow-point ammo section and authorizing the purchase of the cheapest thing within .5" of his POI.

I completely agree however in the large agencies I've delt with I've yet to see a case of that. In the agencies I've dealt with or been employed by, the rangemaster/firearms instruction staff order the ammo...as such the worst we ever got issued was golden saber...I could see in very small agencies that might be an issue, in which case I would exercise a little common sense or maybe see what several agencies are carrying.

Or just go with the nuclear tipped ammo and take your chances if you have to use it...being able to articulate in court why you did what you did is good if it makes sense, having something more substantial to hang your hat on like my local PD and X percent of the PD's in the state/nation use this ammo which is why I chose it is better.

I'm not saying don't use good ammo, quite the opposite, use whatever ammo you want, but be prepared to justify it if you get sued...which you likely will be if you shoot someone...and if you're basing your ammo choice on what is the most effective at killing a target and you say that on the stand you will likely be out a few $$ as a result.

[sammage]

So you don't believe home owners who shoot intruders get sued...are you serious?

Most recent case I read, here, http://law.justia.com/cases/wisconsin/court-of-appeals/2009/36554.html

and in Park vs D'Amico, http://www.buffalonews.com/city/article313145.ece

In Park vs D'Amico, the suit alleges the killing was "malicious" want to bet if the home owner was using hollow points the plaintiff’s lawyer will try to point out the fact that hollow points cause more damage...and are not allowed to be used by the regular US military forces because they violate the Geneva convention...I'm not saying I agree with that nonsense but lawyers will argue anything to try to get paid.

Then as much as I dislike the Post there's this one...which is probably a little better example in the context of this discussion.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/regional/item_ALJSwzpPVzIJgQ7htiXDaP;jsessionid=9603843977D28F1848BA102DB2055A67

You're properly referring to the Hague Convention of 1907, which covers the use of "bullets which expand or flatten easily in the body." What Jsantoro and Iraqgunz were wanting was documentation where the case was won or lost on the basis of the type of ammunition used. None of the links you posted do this either.

[Iraqgunz]

Clearly you are being way too melodramatic and I would love to see some documented proof of this. I'm not saying it can't happen, nor that it has never happened. But, I'd be willing to bet that there were other underlying issues.

Please provide some credible links to your assertion.


Clearly you've not been in court very much...but anyone who is contemplating the possibility of having to defend themselves with lethal force may want to consider more than simply terminal performance when choosing ammo.

When I said defend your choice of ammo, I didn't say or mean defend your bad shooting, I know personally literally dozens of my fellow LEOs who have had to defend themselves in court after a GOOD shooting...do you really think the thugs family isn't going to sue you because you were in the right...especially when they look and see you have a few assets they can get...

And when an over zealous ambulance chasing lawyer is questioning your choice of ammo in the law suit that WILL follow ANY shooting, even a GOOD one...ESPECIALLY if the suspect is dead, being able to defend your choice in ammo by saying it's also what local law enforcement uses in your area is a great way to defuse the situation, plays much better in front of a jury than this guy on m4carbine said this ammo expands really well.

[Iraqgunz]

Are you serious? The highlighted quote by you is one of the more ignorant things I have read here in a while and it goes to show that you don't even have a firm grasp on the subject at hand.


So you don't believe home owners who shoot intruders get sued...are you serious?

Most recent case I read, here, http://law.justia.com/cases/wisconsin/court-of-appeals/2009/36554.html

and in Park vs D'Amico, http://www.buffalonews.com/city/article313145.ece

In Park vs D'Amico, the suit alleges the killing was "malicious" want to bet if the home owner was using hollow points the plaintiff’s lawyer will try to point out the fact that hollow points cause more damage...and are not allowed to be used by the regular US military forces because they violate the Geneva convention...I'm not saying I agree with that nonsense but lawyers will argue anything to try to get paid.

FACT- want to bet means that it didn't happen and you are stating that it could have been a factor when it clearly wasn't and there in no proof that is did.

FACT- what the U.S military chooses is not even relevant at all and any lawyer who used your example would be laughed out of court. The U.S military has to use ammo that is in accordance with various treaties (Hague Convention) and that are not in conflict with the laws of land warfare.

FACT- any defense lawyer with half a brain would simply counter that the use of non expanding ammuntion is a danger to innocent bystanders due to the increased penetration. One could also argue that because of the rounds design more rounds would potentially be fired to stop the threat, thereby increasing the chance of others being hurt or killed.

Then as much as I dislike the Post there's this one...which is probably a little better example in the context of this discussion.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/regional/item_ALJSwzpPVzIJgQ7htiXDaP;jsessionid=9603843977D28F1848BA102DB2055A67

I've read quite a few more over the years, but these are just a few...and as we're becoming a more litigious society every day I expect this trend to get worse not better.

Again you have read and I would be willing to bet that it was read in some gun magazine. The same ones that tell you that the latest whizbang carbine is the best on the market and that if you use a suppressor for home defense you will be hung out to dry.


I completely agree however in the large agencies I've delt with I've yet to see a case of that. In the agencies I've dealt with or been employed by, the rangemaster/firearms instruction staff order the ammo...as such the worst we ever got issued was golden saber...I could see in very small agencies that might be an issue, in which case I would exercise a little common sense or maybe see what several agencies are carrying.

Or just go with the nuclear tipped ammo and take your chances if you have to use it...being able to articulate in court why you did what you did is good if it makes sense, having something more substantial to hang your hat on like my local PD and X percent of the PD's in the state/nation use this ammo which is why I chose it is better.

I'm not saying don't use good ammo, quite the opposite, use whatever ammo you want, but be prepared to justify it if you get sued...which you likely will be if you shoot someone...and if you're basing your ammo choice on what is the most effective at killing a target and you say that on the stand you will likely be out a few $$ as a result.

[kmc0929]

Golddot - molecularly bonded.