Ccw ammo

Dayman

Member
Joined
May 5, 2013
Messages
399
You guys that have been ccw for a while. How often do you cycle your ammo? Do you switch mags up every so often too? Feel free to give me your favorite ammo choices too, specifically 9mm
 

rotarymike

New Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2011
Messages
933
I swap out my magazine about once every 6 months. This was with a Sig P6, so the mags were pretty superb. I now have a Shield, but haven't had it for 6 months yet to tell. I *hope* it's mags loosen up some.

Ammo - only if it gets tarnished or otherwise looks non-new. I'm pretty picky - I only run 9mm 124 grain Federal HSTs. Performance in tests is stellar, and personal testing on water shows good weight retention and just plain nasty expansion. I used to swear by Hydra-shoks, and still have some, but those are older tech.

IMHO, if you carry 9mm, you need to look at advanced tech bullets. HST, Hornady XTP, Gold Dots, Winchester Rangers. I don't shoot 147 grain or +P+ loads simply because I like my guns, and follow-up shot placement is more important than 1 bullet terminal velocity.

Shot placement is king, and ability to shoot your gun well + lots of practice means more than your bullet design. As long as we're not talking FMJ. :)
 

Paco

Member
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
351
I'm currently carrying Critical Duty .45ACP +P 220gr.
It's a better bullet than the Critical Defense line (bonded), with a bit more oomph behind it as well.

They also make it in 135gr 9mm and 135 9mm+P.
 

bilall

Member
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
156
.380 ACP 90 gr HP/XTP from Precision One for my .380 P3AT.
Federal 40 grain hollow points for my backup .22 Mag revolver.
 

Gr8shot

Member
Joined
Mar 24, 2010
Messages
73
I carry Hornady Critical Defense in my Kel Tec .380 and Hydro shok in my .45 acp springfield XDs.
 

Dayman

Member
Joined
May 5, 2013
Messages
399
Thanks for the responses. I have 3 boxes of defense rounds right now: federal hydra shok 147 grain, hornaday critical defense 115 grain, and hornaday critical duty 135 grain. I believe i'm gonna use federal hydra shok for my shield (seems to cycle 147 grain better), critical defense for my G26 (ccw), and critical duty for my bed side gun CZ P-01.
 

thehammer69

Member
Joined
May 12, 2012
Messages
166
I have two carry weapons that I interchange. One is a 3.8" Springfield XDM .45acp. I run Federal HST 230 grain +P in that firearm. The other is a S&W M&P shield .40 s&w....I run 180 Grain Federal HST in it.
 

rotarymike

New Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2011
Messages
933
When the FBI issues it on a regular basis I might be interested.

Until then, wrongful death / excessive use of force lawsuits and/or criminal prosecution for same do not appeal to me.
 

waldengr

New Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2013
Messages
10
bilall said:
.380 ACP 90 gr HP/XTP from Precision One for my .380 P3AT.
Federal 40 grain hollow points for my backup .22 Mag revolver.
agree, agree. liked the performance in three different pistols; no fte/ftf/ or ft anything. did you notice more spark/flame/blast from the muzzle? think i saw a bit more than with federal range ammo, but nothing startling. looking like a good carry round. maybe two-three more boxes to test consistency between lots and then trust pre-1 for self-defense.

cheers, ya'll
 

waldengr

New Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2013
Messages
10
rotarymike said:
When the FBI issues it on a regular basis I might be interested.

Until then, wrongful death / excessive use of force lawsuits and/or criminal prosecution for same do not appeal to me.
hi,
you are the attorney and know much more, but thinking here that if you shoot someone (regardless of the circumstance) you will be arrested, you will be tried, and then comes the civil suits. does it matter what weapon/ammo? if you use fbi loads, will you not face claims you are a "wannabe", looking for something to prove yourself? as an attorney, would you not press the point that the shooter used excessive force because the shooter's calibre was more than the dead person had? having lived in alabama, looziana, texas, south carolina, north dakota and california, i have a book of stories of the defender being convicted, or driven broke with legal fees. my collection is not exhaustive, but haven't yet seen a successful defense based on what law enforcement ammo was in local use. indeed, in the last three years, we witnessed a near-by district attorney declare that he was prosecuting a defender simply to make an example of a civilian using a firearm. the aftermath of a shooting just scares me silly. heck, i am fearful that if i beat a gun-weilding BG with a tire iron, i will be jailed for not running away. dealing with what happens after a successful defense is worrisome...but it is only a concern if i am alive to deal with it, so i own guns. am i over wrought about the potential devastating spill-over from using a firearm? seriously, any advice on what to do to mitigate random acts of legal torture?

cheers, ya'll
 

rotarymike

New Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2011
Messages
933
waldengr said:
seriously, any advice on what to do to mitigate random acts of legal torture?
Not really. Solicitors are people too as imperfect as anyone, and many get caught up in the 'everyone else is a criminal, we just have to catch them' mentality. Also, convictions get promotions and some measure of job security. It is, essentially, their job to be dicks to people.

BUT.

The following is just commentary, not legal advice. Some of it is sarcastic; much is nonetheless true.

SC's (and most other states that have it) Castle Doctrine and the extension provided by Stand Your Ground laws provide that if it is a defensive shooting under those laws, there is no criminal or civil liability. So the family cannot sue you for wrongful death unless they can prove you did something so totally egregious as to be tatamount to intentional reckless homicide. Like, the BG has a gun and you shoot him with an RPG. In your living room. From 10 feet (technical accuracy of that scenario be damned). Or cracky has more entry wounds in his back than his front.

The police on the scene will be the ones who initially determine whether to charge you. The prosecutor will decide if she has enough to convict. They may try to coerce or trick a confession out of you that you weren't acting in self defense against an imminent deadly (or GBH) threat. This is why, after an incident, when the cops show up, just say 'I want to talk to my lawyer first'. AND NOTHING ELSE. Maybe vomit. Nice guys don't like killing other people so that is a typical reaction. Hardened thugs don't care. The cops will be watching your every reaction; none at all is as telling as losing it.

Self-defense is an affirmative defense. That is, if the solicitor decides to indict you, your defense will allege self-defense. Then the state has to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that it wasn't self-defense. This is why George Zimmerman essentially got off, it didn't even get to the point of "was it murder" or not. This is all before they have to prove, again beyond a reasonable doubt, that you committed murder/manslaughter/negligent homicide /etc.

Thing is, the cops do this evaluation all the time. So do the prosecutors. When you've got a guy in the Wal-Mart parking lot with his family, that just bought something, with a job and generally not a felon, who shoots another guy with multiple meth arrests and tox screen comes back for something... I don't have to be omniscient to see that as legitimate self-defense. So the first guy never gets charged. That's why you don't read about it.

While the thought that you have to live through the experience to be able to defend yourself (better to be judged by twelve than carried by six), if you're defending your family you need to be able to defend them again afterwards. Bad guys aren't a one-time thing, and if you cap a gang member trying to rape your daughter, you need to be there for the war that's about to start to keep defending her.

Point of fact about ammo choice: Police officers don't carry ammo to kill people with. They are not soldiers, no matter how much some would like to believe so. They carry arms and ammo to defend themselves and others, and to stop dangerous people from escaping to endanger others. To that end, their arms are chosen for reliability and ability to stop a man efficiently without overuse of force. And budget/politics/kickbacks but that typically says more about the firearm than the ammo. When I carry a gun (now), CCW or otherwise, I do not intend to kill people with it. I intend to use it as a last resort to stop a bad guy from doing a bad thing. When he stops doing the bad thing, I stop shooting. Anything more *is* murder, in the eyes of the law. So using the same armaments as the police, who are carrying for the same reason, is a very powerful argument against excessive force or wrongful death lawsuits and/or criminal charges. Then again, most of the states that allow civil liability after a self-defense shooting are so anti-gun that you kinda should expect that goatrope.

OTOH, shooting someone with your concealed carry Glock 18 might get you charged almost anywhere.

Here's a non-handgun scenario: Home invasion. Grandpa shoots the guy as he comes through the door, kills him. Scenario A: grandpa uses two rounds from his M1A-Socom 16 kitted all out with laser, red dot, rails everywhere, multiple mag pouches on the rifle, and bayonet. Scenario B: grandpa hits him twice with a Remington 700. Same caliber, same shot count, same effect. Who are the cops going to say is using self-defense, and who is 'intentionally killing another person'? You and I know that grandpa probably just grabbed what was closest and readiest. But appearances can damn you before you get a chance to explain yourself in any meaningful way.

TL;DR version: Don't say anything other than to demand a lawyer. Don't shoot someone after they stop being a threat. Use what police agencies use; if nothing else, it is designed to do the task you're asking of it.

Situational awareness is 99% of self-defense.
 

bilall

Member
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
156
waldengr said:
bilall said:
.380 ACP 90 gr HP/XTP from Precision One for my .380 P3AT.
Federal 40 grain hollow points for my backup .22 Mag revolver.
agree, agree. liked the performance in three different pistols; no fte/ftf/ or ft anything. did you notice more spark/flame/blast from the muzzle? think i saw a bit more than with federal range ammo, but nothing startling. looking like a good carry round. maybe two-three more boxes to test consistency between lots and then trust pre-1 for self-defense.

cheers, ya'll
I can't tell much difference in muzzle blast and recoil from my target FMJ and JHP rounds. I've only fired 2 magazines just to test function.
 

waldengr

New Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2013
Messages
10
rotarymike said:
waldengr said:
seriously, any advice on what to do to mitigate random acts of legal torture?
Not really. Solicitors are people too as imperfect as anyone, and many get caught up in the 'everyone else is a criminal, we just have to catch them' mentality. Also, convictions get promotions and some measure of job security. It is, essentially, their job to be dicks to people.

BUT.

The following is just commentary, not legal advice. Some of it is sarcastic; much is nonetheless true.

SC's (and most other states that have it) Castle Doctrine and the extension provided by Stand Your Ground laws provide that if it is a defensive shooting under those laws, there is no criminal or civil liability. So the family cannot sue you for wrongful death unless they can prove you did something so totally egregious as to be tatamount to intentional reckless homicide. Like, the BG has a gun and you shoot him with an RPG. In your living room. From 10 feet (technical accuracy of that scenario be damned). Or cracky has more entry wounds in his back than his front.

The police on the scene will be the ones who initially determine whether to charge you. The prosecutor will decide if she has enough to convict. They may try to coerce or trick a confession out of you that you weren't acting in self defense against an imminent deadly (or GBH) threat. This is why, after an incident, when the cops show up, just say 'I want to talk to my lawyer first'. AND NOTHING ELSE. Maybe vomit. Nice guys don't like killing other people so that is a typical reaction. Hardened thugs don't care. The cops will be watching your every reaction; none at all is as telling as losing it.

Self-defense is an affirmative defense. That is, if the solicitor decides to indict you, your defense will allege self-defense. Then the state has to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that it wasn't self-defense. This is why George Zimmerman essentially got off, it didn't even get to the point of "was it murder" or not. This is all before they have to prove, again beyond a reasonable doubt, that you committed murder/manslaughter/negligent homicide /etc.

Thing is, the cops do this evaluation all the time. So do the prosecutors. When you've got a guy in the Wal-Mart parking lot with his family, that just bought something, with a job and generally not a felon, who shoots another guy with multiple meth arrests and tox screen comes back for something... I don't have to be omniscient to see that as legitimate self-defense. So the first guy never gets charged. That's why you don't read about it.

While the thought that you have to live through the experience to be able to defend yourself (better to be judged by twelve than carried by six), if you're defending your family you need to be able to defend them again afterwards. Bad guys aren't a one-time thing, and if you cap a gang member trying to rape your daughter, you need to be there for the war that's about to start to keep defending her.

Point of fact about ammo choice: Police officers don't carry ammo to kill people with. They are not soldiers, no matter how much some would like to believe so. They carry arms and ammo to defend themselves and others, and to stop dangerous people from escaping to endanger others. To that end, their arms are chosen for reliability and ability to stop a man efficiently without overuse of force. And budget/politics/kickbacks but that typically says more about the firearm than the ammo. When I carry a gun (now), CCW or otherwise, I do not intend to kill people with it. I intend to use it as a last resort to stop a bad guy from doing a bad thing. When he stops doing the bad thing, I stop shooting. Anything more *is* murder, in the eyes of the law. So using the same armaments as the police, who are carrying for the same reason, is a very powerful argument against excessive force or wrongful death lawsuits and/or criminal charges. Then again, most of the states that allow civil liability after a self-defense shooting are so anti-gun that you kinda should expect that goatrope.

OTOH, shooting someone with your concealed carry Glock 18 might get you charged almost anywhere.

Here's a non-handgun scenario: Home invasion. Grandpa shoots the guy as he comes through the door, kills him. Scenario A: grandpa uses two rounds from his M1A-Socom 16 kitted all out with laser, red dot, rails everywhere, multiple mag pouches on the rifle, and bayonet. Scenario B: grandpa hits him twice with a Remington 700. Same caliber, same shot count, same effect. Who are the cops going to say is using self-defense, and who is 'intentionally killing another person'? You and I know that grandpa probably just grabbed what was closest and readiest. But appearances can damn you before you get a chance to explain yourself in any meaningful way.

TL;DR version: Don't say anything other than to demand a lawyer. Don't shoot someone after they stop being a threat. Use what police agencies use; if nothing else, it is designed to do the task you're asking of it.

Situational awareness is 99% of self-defense.

thanx, 'preciate the full response. although i have family in SC, i live in a state (un-named, to protect the idiots) where a major metro PD/DA have city ordinances that allow you to raise the "affirmative defense" when arrested for concealed carry (CC is permited by state law) which allows a permit holder to be stopped for a traffic violation, and arrested for carrying a weapon when that person attempts to inform the officer for saftey assurance. then, once in court (whenever that happens) the permit holder may raise the defense (all of which means the full expense of a trial, and even if acquitted, the permit holder now has an arrest record and will be unable to pass a state background check for purchase of another weapon). the ordinances also do not identify any defense for discharging a firearm (even a BB gun or blank pistol) in the city limits. only recently did the state supreme court injoin (enjoin?) the metro officials from arresting a person traveling through the metro enroute to another destination while having a weapon of any type anywhere in a vehicle. while not well connected politically, i have asked acquaintances in official capacity about this and the response was that if you are involved for any reason in a weapon use situation, you will go to jail, you will go to trial; if you are not convicted of assault or homocide YOU WILL be convicted of discharging a firearm in the metro (the geniuses originally forgot to exempt the police force). when pressed further, the response was that the city offices, and "the people" do not want civilians with weapons, regardless of the state legislature. (all of this a repeat of the first posting). so even though many places may allow initial responders/police to determine if a shooting was "righteous" and decline to charge the GG, you can understand my being squished between the horns of the dilemma.

cheers
 

rotarymike

New Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2011
Messages
933
waldengr said:
thanx, 'preciate the full response. although i have family in SC, i live in a state (un-named, to protect the idiots) where a major metro PD/DA have city ordinances that allow you to raise the "affirmative defense" when arrested for concealed carry (CC is permited by state law) which allows a permit holder to be stopped for a traffic violation, and arrested for carrying a weapon when that person attempts to inform the officer for saftey assurance.
Dude, that sucks. You need to move, if nothing else because that municipality is basically advertising its citizens to the drug gangs and theft rings as an open market.

I would like to know as well. I travel up the coast a lot, as I have family in MD, DE and PA. Obviously I don't CC in MD, but traveling through with gun unloaded in glove box has never been a problem when I've been stopped.

I would wonder that the state laws do not trump local laws, as in SC (and everywhere else - there is a pecking order to the law, and if one higher specifically allows something, then usually the lower laws are null).
 
Top