Who said anything about shooting someone?
Although I didn't specifically make the distinction, I'm talking about not having to shoot $1/rd. at the range (when you can't get WWB).
I'm also talking about ringing that last 5% of performance out of her. Again, this has nothing to do with shooting people. Associative leaps like that are how bad decisions are made about our sport and hobby.
I'm talking about making specific customized ammo for the Rohrbaugh for the enjoyment of the Rohrbaugh. That is all.
I'm not sure I recall seeing anything other than that being theorized in this thread. Maybe I'm wrong?
As for actually having to shoot someone:
I've heard the handload legal argument before... at least 20,000 times.
I'm not sure if it has as much merrit these days as it may have in the past, if it ever had merrit in the first place.
Today I think it's safe to say that the hand gun is accepted as being carried for personal defense. That personal defense includes lethal force. I don't see how a handload could be used by a DA as evidence of 'increased lethality' when all you have to do is present a few ammo ads from gun magazines and see that increased lethality is the order of business with the manufacturers themselves. In other words, having customized ammunition that increases the lethality of the weapon is not out of character for what it is being used for in the first place.
Also, if you have been handloading ammunition for 10 years (or another very long length of time that preceedes the shooting) then it would be difficult to prove pre-meditation unless they were going to go for the ol' "he's been planning on shooting that specific violent criminal for 10 years". This doesn't sound feasible.
Especially when the performance of the bullet ballistically is similar to what manufactureres are producing these days and that the 'recipe' can be found in many publications.
It's not like we're attaching RPG's to our handloads. They are basically the same and that can be measured.
I think that any cases where hand loads have come into play had defective defense attorneys, or the circumstances just didn't work out (the defendant just started handloading before the incident), or it was Kalifornia or New York or some other gun unfriendly place, or a case that hinged on handloads being used never existed in the first place (if you know of one, please correct me so I can study it, thank you).
To me, the handload argument holds NO water. It is simply a meme being carried on from days past by a series of frightened parrots.
That said, I am not confident enough in my own argument here to carry hand loaded ammo frequently, which I am known to do when I do not have any factory ammo. As soon as I get some factor ammo, my carry pistol is loaded with it.
Handloading is a rewarding and interesting hobby. You can wring that last little bit (sometimes a lot) of performance out of your firearms. To me, that makes it worth it, regardless of the cost or the result (as long as the result is not injury of any kind).
It would be great if people could just leave threads alone when they have an off-topic point. Instead of 'What's the point? Gold dots work great!' it could be, "I tried this or that, it worked out this or that way".
Somehow that seems more helpful to me.
Kinda like buying the best pocket pistol in the world.. the Rohrbaugh R9 9mm series. It doesn't make sense to everyone, but it makes sense to me!
