# big bore CPL revolver?????



## Henrik for President (Sep 21, 2009)

What revolver do you carry/recommend for personal protection?

I already have a Glock 19 (9mm), but am looking for a reliable and sturdy revolver. I've been considering .357mag, .41mag, .44mag, Taurus Judge, etc...

My brother reloads for me and I plan to carry during bow season
in the bear woods.

I'm hoping to buy soon, any help is greatly appreciated.


----------



## Danase (Aug 21, 2006)

A Judge for carry? I'd take a .38 or 357 for carry in a revolver. I think all the brands have their ups and downs though. S&W is good, Rossi I like, I've never dealt with Charter but people seem to like them, Ruger is good.


----------



## FarmLegend (Jan 31, 2010)

Check out the Charter Bulldog in .44 special. Not real pretty, but it does reliably go boom when you pull the trigger.


----------



## Stiny357 (Nov 8, 2009)

The Fifth Horseman said:


> Check out the Charter Bulldog in .44 special. Not real pretty, but it does reliably go boom when you pull the trigger.


 

I used to carry one of those, very good gun and not to pricey.


----------



## Swamp Monster (Jan 11, 2002)

I carry a 4" Taurus Tracker in .44 mag. It's a small/medium frame 5 shot that weighs 34oz empty. Pretty light for a 44 mag. Has adjustable sights and a ported barrel. It's pretty darn accurate and has been very reliable. You can also get this model in a .41 mag as well. Taurus also makes a 2" .41 Mag that would be a nice carry piece. I personaly wanted a 4" barrel because it is still compact enough to carry yet easy to shoot well. You can also shoot 44 special loads in this gun if you wanted. For a light gun, it's pretty controllable at the shot. 

I want add a Ruger Super Blackhawk in 44 mag with the 4 5/8" barrel or the standard Blackhawk in .45 Colt. to the collection. They are pretty compact guns but weigh in the low 40 ounce range. Accurate and very, very reliable however.


----------



## 454casull (Jan 6, 2005)

You really have to be careful with your ammo. Reloads may not look good in court if you actually have to use the sidearm. Over penetration is another factor. Plus you better be well practiced as they do not sh0ot as easy as some of the semis; practice is ALWAYS good! Now for the field yes the way to go!


----------



## Rustyaxecamp (Mar 1, 2005)

Ruger SP101 in 357


----------



## sgc (Oct 21, 2007)

Swampmonster - where do you find 44 specials? I've been having a hard time finding them.
Thanks,


----------



## Swamp Monster (Jan 11, 2002)

sgc said:


> Swampmonster - where do you find 44 specials? I've been having a hard time finding them.
> Thanks,


I picked up a couple boxes at On Target in Kalamazoo. Pretty pricey though. I can't even remember the brand. .44 special is not all that common today unfortunately. I have not tried any mail order sources.


----------



## FISH (Jul 14, 2002)

454,
why should you stay away from reloads for a CPL?? i'm curious as to why they would not hold up as well in court? i have a few idea's. But would like to know. Thanks


----------



## 454casull (Jan 6, 2005)

No actual data to support my comment but if you personally loaded the ammo, and let's say it was hotter than factory or used a more destructive projectile, the shootee's lawyer might just try to prove malicious intent. Any CPL instructers care to comment?


----------



## ajmorell (Apr 27, 2007)

454casull said:


> No actual data to support my comment but if you personally loaded the ammo, and let's say it was hotter than factory or used a more destructive projectile, the shootee's lawyer might just try to prove malicious intent. Any CPL instructers care to comment?


IMO dead is dead. I guess I can see where the law/lawyers may think otherwise, but if you had justified use of deadly force I don't see the difference. The goal is to stop the threat and I would think that having the proper ammunition is a big part of that.


----------



## sullyxlh (Oct 28, 2004)

Henrik for President said:


> My brother reloads for me and I plan to carry during bow season
> in the bear woods.


LOL they're Blacks not Grizzlies...............


----------



## FISH (Jul 14, 2002)

IMO handloads Vs. factory loads wouldn't make a difference in court. True, a lawyer could try to use PLA, but if it was a justifiable shooting, in the end it would be a moot point. damn lawyers anyway..


----------



## glockman55 (Mar 9, 2006)

FISH said:


> IMO handloads Vs. factory loads wouldn't make a difference in court. True, a lawyer could try to use PLA, but if it was a justifiable shooting, in the end it would be a moot point. damn lawyers anyway..


Good luck with that , I'll stick to factory loads for my carry weapon. You'll have enough to prove in court. Why not carry a zip gun too?


----------



## malainse (Sep 2, 2002)

glockman55 said:


> I'll stick to factory loads for my carry weapon. You'll have enough to prove in court.


I agree.... Why give an attorney more ammo ?


----------



## Mags (Apr 10, 2002)

FISH said:


> IMO handloads Vs. factory loads wouldn't make a difference in court. True, a lawyer could try to use PLA, but if it was a justifiable shooting, in the end it would be a moot point. damn lawyers anyway..


FISH,

You can do a search of any of a number of articles from Massad Ayoob on why you would always want to use factory loads instead of handloads in your defensive weapon. You should look into his own books and the many articles he's written in Combat Handguns magazine throughout the years.............IMHO, this man is THE authority on the subject as well as being a LEO and expert witness in court about this.


----------



## 9mm Hi-Power (Jan 16, 2010)

ajmorell said:


> IMO dead is dead. I guess I can see where the law/lawyers may think otherwise, but if you had justified use of deadly force *I don't see the difference.* The goal is to stop the threat and I would think that having the proper ammunition is a big part of that.


With all due respect it wouldn't be up to you to see the difference but rather a jury - which could be problematic - especially in a civil case. I agree with many of the previous posts - stick with standard factory ammo. 

I also read somewhere that another step that can be taken to protect oneself from over zealous attorneys is to carry ammo the same or similar to what your local police carry in their handguns. Strongly agree with *Mags* -Massad Ayoob writes a column in "Combat Handguns" which oftentimes deals with issues such as these. His column in the latest issue, for instance, deals with over penetration and the danger it can pose to innocent bystanders and possible subsequent lawsuits even if your shooting is justified. His column and books are well worth reading for anyone who carries. Hope this helps.

9mm Hi Power
a.k.a. Hoppe's no.10


----------



## CMR (Jul 25, 2003)

Mags said:


> FISH,
> 
> You can do a search of any of a number of articles from Massad Ayoob on why you would always want to use factory loads instead of handloads in your defensive weapon. You should look into his own books and the many articles he's written in Combat Handguns magazine throughout the years.............IMHO, this man is THE authority on the subject as well as being a LEO and expert witness in court about this.


So the guy has written some books. Do a search and show me an actual court case regarding reloads and the outcome.

Plus, how the heck is the lawyer gonna know they are reloads?


----------



## 9mm Hi-Power (Jan 16, 2010)

CMR said:


> So the guy has written some books. Do a search and show me an actual court case regarding reloads and the outcome.
> 
> Plus, how the heck is the lawyer gonna know they are reloads?


For starters they handgun and all the ammo in the firearm and in the shooter's possession will be confiscated by the police. In all probability it will all be sent to a state forensic lab to PROVE whether or not any recovered bullets came from the weapon in their possession. Everyone involved will sooner or later have access to the lab report and they *WILL* know whether the ammo in their possession is factory stuff or hand loads.

Cases Where Handloads Caused Problems in Court by Mas Ayoob
This is a post from Mas Ayoob at THR
---------------------------------------------------

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&#8217;s door, the suspect grabbed Kennedy&#8217;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&#8221; barrel then advertised by Speer for the same bullet in loaded cartridge configuration.

This was the first case where I saw the argument, &#8220;Why wasn&#8217;t regular ammunition deadly enough for you,&#8221; 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&#8221; 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&#8221;, and the NJSP Crime Lab in Trenton determined that the gun in question would deposit GSR to a distance of 50&#8221; 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&#8221;. 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&#8217;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&#8217;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&#8217;s office. Challenging the quality of evidence collection, she was able to weaken the prosecution&#8217;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&#8217;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&#8217;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, &#8220;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.&#8221;

He adds, &#8220;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 &#8216;unring the bell.&#8217;&#8221;*

Ms. Smith had this to say, after defending Danny Bias through his last three trials. I asked her, &#8220;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&#8217;s head in her own hand, and kept the case from escalating as it did?&#8221;

She replied, &#8220;You&#8217;re certainly right about that. Gunshot residue was absolutely the focus of the first trial. The prosecution kept going back to the statement, &#8220;It couldn&#8217;t have happened the way he said it did&#8217;.&#8221;

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)
Last edited by Janq : 07-06-2009 at 09:25 AM.




9mm Hi-Power
a.k.a Hoppe's no.10[/B][/B]


----------



## Swamp Monster (Jan 11, 2002)

CMR said:


> Plus, how the heck is the lawyer gonna know they are reloads?


Simple. Your weapon and your ammo will be confiscated by the LEO after responding to the shooting while investigating the incident. Guaranteed, it's going to happen. The LEo may not know they are handloads, but if the investigation leads to questions, you can bet your ammo will be part of that investigation. Have you taken a CPL course?

I see Hoppes beat me to it! He is correct.


----------



## 9mm Hi-Power (Jan 16, 2010)

Swamp Monster said:


> Simple. Your weapon and your ammo will be confiscated by the LEO after responding to the shooting while investigating the incident. Guaranteed, it's going to happen. The LEo may not know they are handloads, but if the investigation leads to questions, you can bet your ammo will be part of that investigation. Have you taken a CPL course?
> 
> I see Hoppes beat me to it! He is correct.




Thanks Swamp Monster - however - since my old computer died and I bought my new one at a fruit stand (Apple ) Michigan Sportsman is insistent that Hoppe's no. 10 no longer exists :yikes: so I've been reincarnated as 9mm Hi-Power.

9mm Hi-Power
once known as: Hoppe's no.10


----------



## CMR (Jul 25, 2003)

Swamp Monster said:


> Simple. Your weapon and your ammo will be confiscated by the LEO after responding to the shooting while investigating the incident. Guaranteed, it's going to happen. The LEo may not know they are handloads, but if the investigation leads to questions, you can bet your ammo will be part of that investigation. Have you taken a CPL course?
> 
> I see Hoppes beat me to it! He is correct.


Yup, I have taken a CPL course and have a CPL.
Guess I shouldn't carry the reloaded ammo from Michigan Gun Co then.


----------



## 9mm Hi-Power (Jan 16, 2010)

CMR said:


> Yup, I have taken a CPL course and have a CPL.
> Guess I shouldn't carry the reloaded ammo from Michigan Gun Co then.


Not sure what kind of ammo the Michigan Gun Co. sells (I never heard of the company) but I would think that commercially reloaded ammo would not be regarded the same as ammo hand loaded by an individual. 

9mm Hi-Power
Hoppe's no.10


----------



## Henrik for President (Sep 21, 2009)

sullyxlh said:


> LOL they're Blacks not Grizzlies...............


I'll be out in Washington state next fall, too.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## glockman55 (Mar 9, 2006)

What was we talking about? Oh ya go with the 44 Mag.


----------



## Henrik for President (Sep 21, 2009)

Thanks for the great info. I'm leaning toward the Ruger SP101.

Everything I've read about it has been positive and it seems that factory carry loads may be more readily available than some of the obscure rounds (.41, .44, .327).
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Rustyaxecamp (Mar 1, 2005)

I really like mine. Get on to http://www.rugerforum.net/index.php and look around. Granted they are a little biased, as it is a Ruger site, but lots of good info.

I went with a Simply Rugged Silver Dollar Pancake holster. Works great. Keeps the gun high and tight to my side and retains it awesome.

I run Hydrshocks for city carry and Federal Fusions for woods carry.


----------



## alex-v (Mar 24, 2005)

Henrik for President said:


> My brother reloads for me and I plan to carry during bow season in the bear woods.


So does this comment mean that you are looking for something that you will be able to use to protect yourself from a bear attack?? If that is the case then reloads vs factory will not make any difference.

Nothing less than a 44 Mag for bears and keep in mind that you will have fractions of a second to respond to an attack. Most people would spend several seconds reacting and then getting the handgun out of concealment. Bears can cover a lot of ground in just one second.



Henrik for President said:


> Thanks for the great info. I'm leaning toward the Ruger SP101.
> 
> Everything I've read about it has been positive and it seems that factory carry loads may be more readily available than some of the obscure rounds (.41, .44, .327).


None of those are obscure. Maybe a bit harder to find in inexpensive volumes but certainly not obscure.


----------



## buck snort (Nov 9, 2007)

s&w air weight in .38 special


----------



## alex-v (Mar 24, 2005)

buck snort said:


> s&w air weight in .38 special


If he really does want something for bear protection that round is at the bottom of the list. It would not be recommended for deer so it would not make it as a go-to round for bear, even Black Bear. Great round for protection against 2 legged critters, though.


----------



## ajmorell (Apr 27, 2007)

alex-v said:


> If he really does want something for bear protection that round is at the bottom of the list. It would not be recommended for deer so it would not make it as a go-to round for bear, even Black Bear. Great round for protection against 2 legged critters, though.


x2. The minimum for bear IMO is 357 mag and I wouldn't dare take on a grizzly with a 357, even with 180 grain hard case or 180 grain partitions.


----------



## 454casull (Jan 6, 2005)

Okay for bear protection 41mag or better, 357 with 180gr bullets or better will "do". If this is the extent of your use of a sidearm then have at it handload wise. Let me make a distinction that missed earlier. Reloads either commercial or personal that mimic factory specs MAY not get you into hot water. But, a handload, hotter etc. surely will. *Mas* is THE man when it comes to gunfights and their outcomes in court. If he writes it it is true PERIOD! Not many people I will say that about. His summary of the Miami massacre is said to be the most comprehensive and accurate invetigation of the event.


----------



## SNAREMAN (Dec 10, 2006)

Would'nt be anywhere near my top choices for bear protection,but for everyday carry I love my sp101.Not hard to carry/hide,its weight really tames even the full house 357's and can shoot 38's which means I can shoot it alot,and not go broke


----------



## Nick Adams (Mar 10, 2005)

Henrik for President said:


> What revolver do you carry/recommend for personal protection?
> ... I plan to carry during bow season in the bear woods.


I wouldn't find it necessary to carry anything for protection from bears during Michigan's archery season.

The only time they are the least bit dangerous is running across a mother with cubs in the spring. Even then she's more interest in 'running you off' than 'taking you out'. I've weathered my share of those kind of incidents over the years simply by moving away from them.

-na


----------



## buck snort (Nov 9, 2007)

His first post was a pistol for his cpl license not bear gun. the air weight a good choice for concealed carry


----------



## POLARBEAR (May 13, 2002)

I really like the S&W 386pd. It's an air lite, 7 or 8 shot 357mag.... 3 inch barrel with adjustable sights on most. I have not shot one yet but am looking forward to it. Should be easy to conceal and not to harsh to shoot. 

I didnt see where you gave a price range you are looking in?

http://www.gunshopfinder.com/smithandwesson/smithandwesson386PD.asp

http://smith-wessonforum.com/guns-s...t-additional-firearms-added-thread-2-4-a.html


----------



## chamookman (Sep 1, 2003)

Take a look at the S&W 325PD. I'm a 1911 Guy (carry a Wilson daily), but also have a 325 PD that I carry on occation. Nice little carry piece, did I mention that I'm a firm believer in the .45 ACP :lol:. C-man


----------



## Enigma (Jan 30, 2006)

Thats what I carry 1911 colt compact 45 acp.That will stop any man.


----------



## Swamp Monster (Jan 11, 2002)

Nick Adams said:


> I wouldn't find it necessary to carry anything for protection from bears during Michigan's archery season.
> 
> -na




I tend to agree but the "mental" protection a firearm sometimes provides is more necessary than any actual physical protection.  Something to be said for the comfort factor...real or perceived.


----------

