Many of the writers and instructors will tell you to avoid doing anything that could be used against you or make you look bad in court. Handloads are hard to explain as better than factory loads. For the non-gun and non-technical jury member, it is easier for the plaintiff or DA to show you loaded them to be more deadly, and claim this proves the intent to kill. They will also have the rounds from your gun there, along with the fired rounds. If they really wanted to be unfair, compare your handload (hollow point and mushroomed, probably) to how the standard military round (full metal jacket ball ammo, almost untouched and still round) looks and they can easily convince the jury you meant to injure more. The caliber you chose can also be used this way, as Harold Fish found out with his 10 mm rounds (IIRC).Bisley wrote:Would you also address the question of whether the use of hand loads for self defense would be any more likely to put a person in civil jeopardy, than say, having attended a hand gun self defense school?
The reason I ask for this comparison is that so many of the self defense writers that advise most stridently against the use of hand loaded ammo, will then recommend that a concealed handgun permit holder attend as many self defense classes as possible. To me, this is a bit of a contradiction, in that either could be 'spun' to suggest that a person was seeking a deadly confrontation.
Training, on the other hand, is much easier to show as being defensive in nature. "I went to extra training to make sure I could hit only my target and not innocent bystanders" as one example. "I went to training to learn how to not get killed myself or get my gun taken away from me" is another. And not having the course in court to show people, they would have to rely on your description of what you learned or the trainer's advertising and testimony. Not too many trainers are willing to say "I taught him how to kill people more efficiently" so it is less likely to get brought up.
The last thing to remember is that many of these gun writers are located in other states and governed by other laws. When you are writing for national audiences, you cannot be too careful on what you say. Many of them also repeat old wives tales that have been accepted for years. I don't really know if handloads would be used against you in court because almost everyone has bought into this theory and we all recommend using standard ammo, preferably the same ammo the local police use in the same caliber. Are we right or are we just a self-fulfilling prophecy?