Jump to content

Do any of the experts recommend using target ammo in your carry guns?


Recommended Posts

Do any of the experts recommend using target ammo in your carry guns? My accuracy is much better with target ammo than with the hotter "self defense" ammunition so why not just use this ammo all the time? Also I think "target" ammo would kill someone just as fast as the "self defense" loads. Are there any studies that show that self defense bullets make you more dead than target bullets? Won't a torso or head shot with a target bullet get the job done just as well as the hollow points or high grain bullets? Isn't shot placement accuracy more important than having the most powerful bullet? Also I think "target" bullet is a misnomer since all bullets can be lethal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, ANY projectile is 'potentially' lethal just like any projectile is 'potentially' non-lethal. ALL shooting incidents are unique events and very few universal conclusions can be drawn from them. It's what makes caliber wars rather pointless.

 

It is a ballistic fact that most hollow point ammo produces a larger wound channel vs FMJ.

 

It is also true that the reason most folks use 'practice' ammo is because it costs a lot less and they want to fire more rounds in training to hopefully develop better accuracy. As a skill and should the SD need ever arise, however unlikely that is.

 

HP ammo is pretty much universally recommended in center-fire calibers for self defense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do any of the experts recommend using target ammo in your carry guns? My accuracy is much better with target ammo than with the hotter "self defense" ammunition so why not just use this ammo all the time? Also I think "target" ammo would kill someone just as fast as the "self defense" loads. Are there any studies that show that self defense bullets make you more dead than target bullets? Won't a torso or head shot with a target bullet get the job done just as well as the hollow points or high grain bullets? Isn't shot placement accuracy more important than having the most powerful bullet? Also I think "target" bullet is a misnomer since all bullets can be lethal.

I'm not an expert but I'd suggest that, in a self defense event, you adjust your thinking to stopping the threat rather than making a kill shot. Stopping the threat may end in death, but it doesn't have to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Target ammunition typically uses bullets that don't expand and often your best accuracy is not usually found at higher velocities. Self defense ammo will have higher velocities which makes bullets expand better, cause more tissue damage and usually helps with deeper penetration (not always but it helps).

 

 

Would it subdue an attacker, yes a bullet placed into the brain of anything will do the trick, and doesn't need alot of power to do that. Good luck under stress doing that. I think if you will try more self defense ammunitions you might find some very well shooting rounds. With all the 'fancy' 9mm self defense loads out there I have found that the standard 124 gr Hornady XTP (not a +P round) shoots very well, cycles well and tends to make things dead that I have used it for. Yes there are other 124 and 115 gr rounds with more speed, yes there are other rounds with more accuracy, but that 124 XTP shoots as tight of a group as it needs to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm no expert...

I see no need for "hot" loads, +P or +P+.

At the range I use 124gr Speer Lawman. With a smaller occasional carry gun I go with the 147gr. It feels a little less snappy. For carry I choose the Gold Dot with specs closest to the practice ammo for that gun.

I like the Speer philosophy...

 

When you train, you want ammunition that is reliable, with feel and point of aim that’s as close as possible to your self-defense loads. You also need it to be affordable. Speer® Lawman® ammunition brings great consistency at an attractive price, and also features reloadable cases. Find your ideal training load in a variety of calibers from 32 Auto to 45 Auto. With excellent accuracy and ballistics similar to Gold Dot® loads, it offers the most realistic practice possible.

 

I'm making this part up just for me... I don't think I need to worrry about the penetration a hotter load might provide. I won't be shooting through car doors or cover that might slow down a bullet. I want a round (and a gun) that I can reliably shoot every time. No surprises. For cops and others that may find themselves in a combat situation, this may be different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do any of the experts recommend using target ammo in your carry guns?

None that I know of. You shoot to stop the threat, not shoot someone else unintentionally . An ideal self defense bullet would transfer all of its energy to the threat and not leave the body. Hollow points are less likely to over penetrate than full metal jacket rounds. The FMJ can pass through the threat and a wall with enough mass and energy to kill an innocent person behind the wall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Experts in New Jersey have determined that target ammo is better than hollow points for self defense.

NJ "experts" (i.e., the state legislators) determined that HP ammo is too scary for private individuals to use (or even to own).

 

To the original point, target vs. defense rounds are all about FMJ vs. JHP, not the charge. Regular P is plenty of P. I've seen posts by people who firmly believe FMJ is fine for self-defense, but legal precedent says otherwise. In the 49 states that aren't NJ, if your FMJ round shoots through your target and hits someone else, you could face criminal charges (like manslaughter or murder of the innocent person) for not using JHP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally I'm of the opinion that it's better to be loaded with something you are comfortable shooting then something you are not.

 

That said instead of using 'practice rounds' or 'top end high power SD rounds' if you want a compromise get some generic hollow points and practice with those as well as carry those, then if the situation does arrise you are familar with the rounds in your firearm. IMO no need to add additional strees the in the back of the head worrying about the difference in the hot loads that are in the gun when the poop hits the fan.

 

Of course SD ammo almost always offers better on paper paper results, but at the end of the day being able to actually hit the target with a well placed shot will outweigh what is written on paper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s funny, I am kind of the opposite. I practice with the cheapest bulk ammo I can find (often Walmart Winchester White box, but sometimes something online). I carry Federal Premium HST, and occasionally shoot a magazine through my carry gun just to rotate the ammo. It is pricy, so I don’t do it too often.

 

I find that my groupings are much tighter with the pricier ammo than the bulk. However I have never done a blind test, so it could be that I am stepping up my game knowing it is different ammo. I think next time I am out I will try a blind test to see if I can see the difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Won't a torso or head shot with a target bullet get the job done just as well as the hollow points

NO. I show an NRA training film in my Defensive Pistol class that demonstrates why we recommend hollow points for self defense. In the film a 5 lb ham resting on a stool is shot from a distance of about 10 feet with a 115 gr FMJ and a 115 gr hollow point from a 9mm service pistol. The FMJ entry wound is about the size of a nickle and the exit wound about the size of a golf ball and did not even knock the ham off of the stool. The hollow point tore out a chunk bigger than a soft ball and threw the ham off the stool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny story....

Yesterday I was at the range with a guest...

Brought along a few pistols....

 

I decided to put a few rounds down range with my carry pistol. A Glock 26.

I had a spare 10 round mag. Used some 115gr FMJ target rounds. Fired...Loaded more... Turned to chat for a few seconds...turned back and grabbed the magazine with my carry rounds...accidentally.

These are Winchester Ranger T series 127gr +p+.

I fired the full 10 rounds.

Loaded another mag (target rounds)....ran fine.

Then...I realized...I think I shot my carry rounds! (Stop laughing!!!!)

(Luckily, I had a spare 15 round mag with the same carry ammo. So I transferred those rounds to the standard 10 round mag)

 

Point is...I didn't even realize I shot my 'hot' HP rounds until I went to slap that mag back in to reholster.

 

Perhaps it something like that would be obvious with a smaller pistol, but as far as it went with a G26...I never even knew the difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One concern that I used to see in discussions of this type was the ineffectiveness of hollow points in lesser handgun rounds.

Or with all rounds, when the cavity fills with layers of outer clothing during cold weather [preventing expansion].

 

But that was a while ago.

In the interim, I have seen attempts at better HP ammo, bush as hydroshock with the post in side the cavity,
and types of high-velocity low-weight personal protection ammo.

I like the kind with the polycarbonate ball covering the cavity.
I think it prevents feed ramp problems, and I bet it resists fouling the cavity with cloth or leather.

I wonder if NJ considers the ball-tipped ammo to be the dreaded hollowpoints.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do any of the experts recommend using target ammo in your carry guns? My accuracy is much better with target ammo than with the hotter "self defense" ammunition so why not just use this ammo all the time? Also I think "target" ammo would kill someone just as fast as the "self defense" loads. Are there any studies that show that self defense bullets make you more dead than target bullets? Won't a torso or head shot with a target bullet get the job done just as well as the hollow points or high grain bullets? Isn't shot placement accuracy more important than having the most powerful bullet? Also I think "target" bullet is a misnomer since all bullets can be lethal.

 

You tube has all kind of test results showing gel tests of many different calibers , weights and hollow points , plus FMJ . Google you tube and your choice of ammo and there will probably be a video of a gel test being done.

 

The FBI standard for penetration is 12 to 18 inches and that is what most hollow point ammo manufacturers strive for. This is so you don't have to worry about hurting or even killing someone who is behind your target in a self defense seanario .

 

The .380 acp is a great example of people saying you should use a FMJ . This old saying is false because it has been shown that the Hornady 90 gr. XTP load is the best for defense out of the short barrels of most .380s .

 

Like I said , go to you tube and do some research .

 

My opinion ..... never use FMJ for defense unless that is the only thing you have on hand at the time needed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The .380 acp is a great example of people saying you should use a FMJ . This old saying is false because it has been shown that the Hornady 90 gr. XTP load is the best for defense out of the short barrels of most .380s .

The Hornady 90gr FTX .380 is one of the ones that I was thinking of in terms of the plastic insert.

I think it is loaded similarly to the XTP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hollowpoints have a dual purpose: to stop inside your target which will both deliver greater knock down force and help protect innocent people in the area from getting hit by a projectile that may otherwise pass right through your target and strike them. You need to think of the innocent people who may be around or inside homes or businesses if you suddenly need to defend yourself. And hot load rounds are unnecessary, regular old 9mm, 45 ACP, 357 Mag, 38 special or similar is perfectly sufficient to stop any assailant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Defensive rounds or target rounds, which would make you more dead?

 

Color me confused as dead is dead.

Dear confused, the goal is to stop the threat. Death may be a side effect, but not the goal. Ask a seasoned deer hunter how far a deer can run after its "dead". I once shot a deer that after field dressing discovered that the heart had been completely destroyed. Exploded into pieces. That deer ran 65 paces before it fell. A "dead" man can do the same. Focus on stopping the threat. On a side note, which sounds better? Your honor I shot that guy to kill him. OR Your honor I shot that guy to make him stop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe I forgot the purple

Maybe when saying something is dead it is dead

But either way the OP is getting his results!

 

Just FYI his words not mine, more dead!

 

How soon we forget..........

Sorry, without the purple I could not judge your intent. I thought the OP asked a good question that required good answers and I see no reason his question would ever come back to haunt him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you show me one time that a jury EVER based a self defense shooting justification on the basis of ammo used?

 

 

Massad Ayoob will probably have some examples from cases he's been an expert witness for.

 

I emailed him once and he got right back to me and I've never taken one of his courses, but should have by now.

 

mas@massadayoob.com
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Can you show me one time that a jury EVER based a self defense shooting justification on the basis of ammo used?

 

 

Massad Ayoob will probably have some examples from cases he's been an expert witness for.

 

I emailed him once and he got right back to me and I've never taken one of his courses, but should have by now.

 

mas@massadayoob.com

 

You are guessing. There are no known cases of a jury ever basing a self defense shooting verdict on the type of ammo used. The question is was the shooting justified. Someone PROVE me wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted · Hidden by mauserme, May 19, 2019 at 06:26 PM - No reason given
Hidden by mauserme, May 19, 2019 at 06:26 PM - No reason given

I'm going to be frank and to the point: Definitely DON'T use target or FMJ rounds for self defense. Always use a QUALITY jacketed hollow point. Pretty much every expert worth their salt will say this. That's a clue. Also, there's a reason why the FBI and every police department in America use JHP and not FMJ or target loads. That's another clue.

If you did any amount of research before posting here you'd know that the above is true and you wouldn't even consider asking such a question.

Whatever minimal accuracy gain you think you're getting in target rounds over self defense rounds is very likely not going to matter in a self defense situation. If your accuracy is really so much better with target loads than self defense rounds (which I doubt and it is probably negligible), the problem is you and you need more training. That's the hard truth.

 

Use quality hollow point ammunition from a respectable manufacturer. Head over to the Lucky Gunner Labs website, they have tremendous data for a slew of defensive rounds in all of the common carry calibers shot from carry sized barrels. Excellent data and information. Ideally you want between 12"-18" of penetration and at least 0.60" expansion for the test results. Personally I prefer 147gr HST but that's just me.

 

DO NOT use hand loads for self defense, because it CAN and HAS been used against people in the court of law.

 

Here is a post by American Firearms and self-defense instructor Massad Ayoob on the liability dangers of using re-loads for self defense:

 

Cases Where Handloads Caused Problems in Court:

 

As promised, here are the sources for records for any who feel a need to confirm the cases I have referenced previously where handloaded ammunition caused problems for people in the aftermath of shootings.

 

As I have noted in this thread earlier, and as the attorneys who have responded to this matter have confirmed, local trials and results are not usually available on-line. However, in each case, I have included the location where the physical records of the trials are archived.

 

NH v. Kennedy

 

James Kennedy, a sergeant on the Hampton, NH police force, pursued a drunk driver whose reckless operation of the vehicle had forced other motorists off the road. The suspect ended up in a ditch, stalled and trying to get underway again. Advised by radio that responding backup officers were still a distance away, and fearing that the man would get back on the road and kill himself and others, Kennedy approached the vehicle. At the driver's door, the suspect grabbed Kennedy's Colt .45 auto and pulled it towards himself. It discharged in his face, causing massive injury.

 

The reload in the gun was a 200 grain Speer JHP, loaded to duplicate the 1000 fps from a 5" barrel then advertised by Speer for the same bullet in loaded cartridge configuration.

 

This was the first case where I saw the argument, "Why wasn't regular ammunition deadly enough for you?" used by opposing counsel. They charged Kennedy with aggravated assault. They made a large issue out of his use of handloads, suggesting that they were indicative of a reckless man obsessed with causing maximum damage.

 

Defense counsel hired the expert I suggested, Jim Cirillo, who did a splendid job of demolishing that argument and other bogus arguments against Kennedy at trial, and Kennedy was acquitted.

 

This case dates back to the late 1970s. The local courts tell me that the case documentation will be on file at Rockingham County Superior Court, PO Box 1258, Kingston, NH 03843. File search time is billed at $25 per hour for cases such as this that date back prior to 1988.

 

NJ V. Bias

 

This is the classic case of gunshot residue (GSR) evidence being complicated by the use of handloaded ammunition, resulting in a case being misinterpreted in a tragic and unjust way. On the night of 2/26/89, Danny Bias entered the master bedroom of his home to find his wife Lise holding the family home defense revolver, a 6" S&W 686, to her head. He told police that knowing that she had a history of suicidal ideation, he attempted to grab the gun, which discharged, killing her. The gun was loaded with four handloaded lead SWC cartridges headstamped Federal .38 Special +P.

 

Autopsy showed no GSR. The medical examiner determined that Lise Bias had a reach of 30", and the NJSP Crime Lab in Trenton determined that the gun in question would deposit GSR to a distance of 50" or more with either factory Federal 158 grain SWC +P .38 Special, or handloads taken from his home under warrant for testing after Danny told them about the reloads. However, the reloads that were taken and tested had Remington-Peters headstamps on the casings and were obviously not from the same batch.

 

Danny had loaded 50 rounds into the Federal cases of 2.3, 2.6, and 2.9 grains of Bullseye, with Winchester primers, under an unusually light 115 grain SWC that he had cast himself, seeking a very light load that his recoil sensitive wife could handle. The gun had been loaded at random from that box of 50 and there was no way of knowing which of the three recipes was in the chamber from which the fatal bullet was launched.

 

We duplicated that load, and determined that with all of them and particularly the 2.3 grain load, GSR distribution was so light that it could not be reliably gathered or recovered, from distances as short as 24". Unfortunately, the remaining rounds in the gun could not be disassembled for testing as they were the property of the court, and there is no forensic artifact that can determine the exact powder charge that was fired from a given spent cartridge.

 

According to an attorney who represented him later, police originally believed the death to be a suicide. However, the forensic evidence testing indicated that was not possible, and it was listed as suspicious death. Based largely on the GSR evidence, as they perceived it, the Warren County prosecutor's office presented the case to the grand jury, which indicted Danny Bias for Murder in the First Degree in the death of his wife.

 

Attorney John Lanza represented Danny very effectively at his first trial, which ended in a hung jury. Legal fees exceeded $100,000, bankrupting Danny; Attorney Lanza, who believed then and now in his client's innocence, swallowed some $90,000 worth of legal work for which he was never paid.

 

For his second trial, Bias was assigned attorney Elisabeth Smith by the Public Defender's office. Challenging the quality of evidence collection, she was able to weaken the prosecution's allegation that the GSR factor equaled murder, but because the GSR issue was so muddled by the handloaded ammo factor, she could not present concrete evidence that the circumstances were consistent with suicide, and the second trial ended with a hung jury in 1992. At this point, the prosecution having twice failed to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt, the judge threw out the murder charge.

 

It was after this that I personally lost track of the case. However, I've learned this past week that the case of NJ v. Daniel Bias was tried a third time in the mid-1990s, resulting in his being acquitted of Aggravated Manslaughter but convicted of Reckless Manslaughter. The appellate division of the Public Defender's office handled his post-conviction relief and won him a fourth trial. The fourth trial, more than a decade after the shooting, ended with Danny Bias again convicted of Reckless Manslaughter. By now, the state had changed its theory and was suggesting that Danny had pointed the gun at her head to frighten her, thinking one of the two empty chambers would come up under the firing pin, but instead discharging the gun. Danny Bias was sentenced to six years in the penitentiary, and served three before being paroled. He remains a convicted felon who cannot own a firearm.

 

It is interesting to hear the advice of the attorneys who actually tried this case. John Lanza wrote, "When a hand load is used in an incident which becomes the subject of a civil or criminal trial, the duplication of that hand load poses a significant problem for both the plaintiff or the prosecutor and the defendant. Once used, there is no way, with certainty, to determine the amount of powder or propellant used for that load. This becomes significant when forensic testing is used in an effort to duplicate the shot and the resulting evidence on the victim or target."

 

He adds, "With the commercial load, one would be in a better position to argue the uniformity between the loads used for testing and the subject load. With a hand load, you have no such uniformity. Also, the prosecution may utilize either standard loads or a different hand load in its testing. The result would be distorted and could be prejudicial to the defendant. Whether or not the judge would allow such a scientific test to be used at trial, is another issue, which, if allowed, would be devastating for the defense. From a strictly forensic standpoint, I would not recommend the use of hand loads because of the inherent lack of uniformity and the risk of unreliable test results. Once the jury hears the proof of an otherwise unreliable test, it can be very difficult to 'unring the bell'."

 

Ms. Smith had this to say, after defending Danny Bias through his last three trials. I asked her, "Is it safe to say that factory ammunition, with consistently replicable gunshot residue characteristics, (would) have proven that the gun was within reach of Lise's head in her own hand, and kept the case from escalating as it did?"

 

She replied, "You're certainly right about that. Gunshot residue was absolutely the focus of the first trial. The prosecution kept going back to the statement, "It couldn't have happened the way he said it did".

 

The records on the Bias trials should be available through:

The Superior Court of New Jersey

Warren County

313 Second Street

PO Box 900

Belvedere, NJ 07823

 

Those who wish to follow the appellate track of this case will find it in the Atlantic Reporter.

 

142 N.J. 572, 667 A.2d 190 (Table)

 

Supreme Court of New Jersey

State

v.

Daniel N. Bias

NOS. C-188 SEPT.TERM 1995, 40,813

Oct 03, 1995

Disposition: Cross-pet. Denied.

N.J. 1995.

State v. Bias

142 N>J> 572, 667 A.2d 190 (Table)

 

 

TN v. Barnes

 

The decedent attacked Robert Barnes and his young daughter with a large knife and was shot to death by the defendant with SJHP .38 Special reloads from a Smith & Wesson Model 36. The distance between the two at the time of the shooting became a key element in the trial, and a misunderstanding of that distance was a primary reason he was charged with Murder. The evidence was messed up in a number of ways in this case, and I do not believe the reloaded ammo (which the prosecution did not recognize to be such until during the trial) was the key problem, but it definitely was part of a problem in reconstructing the case. We were able to do that without GSR evidence, and Mr. Barnes won an acquittal. In this case, I believe the use of factory ammo, combined with proper handling and preserving of the evidence by the initial investigators, would have made the defense much easier and might well have prevented the case from ever being lodged against him.

 

The records of TN v. Barnes are archived under case number 87297015 at:

 

Criminal Justice Center

201 Poplar

Suite 401

Memphis, TN 38103

 

Iowa v. Cpl. Randy Willems

 

A man attempted to disarm and murder Corporal Randy Willems of the Davenport, IA Police Department, screaming "Give me your (expletive deleted) gun, I'll blow your (expletive deleted) brains out." Willems shot him during the third disarming attempt, dropping him instantly with one hit to the abdomen from a department issue factory round, Fiocchi 9mm 115 grain JHP +P+. The subject survived and stated that the officer had shot him for nothing from a substantial distance away. GSR testing showed conclusively that the subject's torso was approximately 18" from the muzzle of the issue Beretta 92 when it discharged. Randy was acquitted of criminal charges in the shooting at trial in 1990. Two years later, Randy and his department won the civil suit filed against them by the man who was shot.

 

I use this case when discussing handloads because it is a classic example of how the replicability of factory ammunition, in the forensic evidence sense, can annihilate false allegations by the bad guy against the good guy who shot him. The records of State of Iowa v. Corporal Randy Willems are archived in the Iowa District Court in Scott County, Davenport, Iowa. Those from the civil suit, Karwoski v. Willems and the City of Davenport, should be at the Iowa Civil Court of Scott County, also located in Davenport, Iowa.

 

A final word: I did not research the above and place it here to placate lightweight net ninjas. I did it because three recent Internet threads led me to believe that a number of decent people had honest questions about the real-world concerns about using handloads for self-defense, and were possibly putting themselves in jeopardy by doing so. For well over a decade, certain people have been creating an urban myth that says, No one has ever gotten in trouble in court because they used handloads.

 

This is now absolutely, and I hope finally, refuted.

 

Respectfully submitted,

Massad Ayoob

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...