Any liability with modifying a gun used for self defense?

I have read on this forum where folks fear that modifying a weapon that is actually used for defending your life may result in charges brought against you.

I don't know if this could actually happen within reason, I can see how if you bolt a rocket launcher on your shotgun perhaps you would run afoul of the law, but would something as simple as lightening the trigger or improving the sights become fodder for an overzealous attorney?

I doubt it would lead to "charges being brought against you", but a modification could certainly be the target of an attempt by a prosecutor to assassinate your character. Think about it, if I was a over-zealous, anti-gun prosecutor, trying to find a way to make you look negligent or malicious in front of a jury, would it be easier or harder for me to do that if you had (just as an example) pinned down the grip safety on your 1911?

"This man was so cavalier in his attitude towards safety, that he knowingly and purposefully disabled an essential safety device inside of his weapon, all in an attempt to make it easier for him to kill or injure somebody like the victim in this case........"

You mean aside from having the gun fail from a modification?

IANAL. Those who are tell me that if you make the mistake of saying you shot "accidentally" or are in questionable circumstances, you are likely to be put under a microscope and criticized for everything. So yes, there is potential liability in anything unusual you do: modified gun, special ammo, late shot, conflicting story, running your mouth, or ????


It varies widely by individual state laws, and that's why they have lawyers and courts.

As the saying goes, "The law may upset reason, but reason may not upset the law." In other words, anything goes in a court room but common sense.

I suppose an overzealous prosecutor, or the plaintiff's attorney in a civil suit, could try to make a case for some things, like using "hot" loads for example, as being overly aggressive...but I can't see how making a modification to a handgun that makes it more reliable would be an issue.

Then again, I am trying to apply common sense...

Lost Lake said:

I have read on this forum where folks fear that modifying a weapon that is actually used for defending your life may result in charges brought against you.

I don't know if this could actually happen within reason, I can see how if you bolt a rocket launcher on your shotgun perhaps you would run afoul of the law, but would something as simple as lightening the trigger or improving the sights become fodder for an overzealous attorney?

Click to expand...

It really depends on where you live. I'm not aware of a case in Texas where the modification of the weapon was a major issue in the trial.

Your best bet is to consult a local lawyer that is familiar with such issues.

I wouldnt go as far to alter my bullets to dum dum and rub garlic in them.

Depends upon the modifications and who does them. However, as noted, ANYTHING can become fuel for a courtroom battle-and you're paying not only the legal tab, but possibly the verdict.

Trigger work, by an authorized/trained service person, that keeps the weight of pull within factory specification is defensible. As are better sights and stocks to help the weapon fit your hand (increase your control over the weapon).

Work by other persons or to other specifications puts you at risk. How much risk varies by circumstance and/or where you live.

Your own words, after a shooting, will do you more damage than modifications to your gun before a shooting.

What modifications are necessary to your carry pistol? Is it anything that could be solved by buying a new or better quality pistol?

In a by-the-books justified shooting that is completely black and white, it won't matter what gun or ammo you used or what changes you made to it. Unfortunately, our world and our legal system operate in shades of gray. Any decision you make to alter a carry gun or ammunition should be weighed carefully against the possible repercussions. As other posters have pointed out, prosecutors (civil or criminal) will not hesitate to call attention to any facts they may discover that could be construed to paint you in an unfavorable light.

For me, it's a stock pistol with store-bought PD ammo.

This is a subject that has been discussed may times and the answer is it could. In a SD scenario, after the shooting comes the shooting investigation. The investigation will determine if you were justified in using deadly force or not. The investigators will look at your gun and ask you routine questions about it. After the investigation your case is presented to the Grand Jury for review. The outcome of that will be indictment/no bill. Indictment=go to trial, be acquitted or go to prision. No bill=go home. Whether you are indicted or no billed, tried or acquitted, there will ALWAYS be a civil trial. You can take that to the bank. During this civil trial is where mods to a gun will come into play. Anything you do to a gun that deviates from factory specs will come into question. Things like lighter triggers, polishing/honing of internal parts, removal/modification of factory installed safeties. Even something as mundane as adding night sights, a tactical light or even a magwell will be questioned by the plaintiffs. How do I know these things? I've been there and I'm in the middle of a civil case now regarding my last on-duty shooting. The gun I used was a slightly modified 4006TSW. By slightly modified I mean I added night sights, a light, had the feed ramp and breechface polished and added a lighter hammer spring . All this was done by S&W at my request. Everything I mentioned above has been brought into question by the plaintiff's attorney to make it sound like I did these things because I wanted to kill the deceased when in fact everything I had done was to make the gun more reliable/user friendly. I was questioned about every single thing done to the gun. Here are some of my replies:

Night sights: To ensure I hit what I'm aiming at and not injure or kill an uninvolved person by a poorly placed shot.

Tactical light: So I can identify my target and backstop.

Polishing: To enhance reliability

Lighter hammer spring: Because I didn't like the double action trigger pull.

So, with all that being said modifying your gun MAY be an issue if you're sued. The kicker is this, as long as the mods you make don't void the manufacturers warranty and do not make the gun inherently unsafe you'll be fine.

Bratastic007 said:

What modifications are necessary to your carry pistol? Is it anything that could be solved by buying a new or better quality pistol?

Click to expand...

I have a Streamlight on mine, and I was thinking of putting an Apex trigger in it. I think I could easily defend the Streamlight, but what about trigger mods? Could a better trigger be skewed in such a way as to make me seem like a trigger happy killer? If the weapon is changed from S&W specs, I bet a good lawyer would jump on that to paint an unsavory image of me and my actions.

We know thousands upon thousands of weapons have trigger work done. Are we all at risk if we defend ourselves with these?

Lost Lake said:

I have a Streamlight on mine, and I was thinking of putting an Apex trigger in it. I think I could easily defend the Streamlight, but what about trigger mods? Could a better trigger be skewed in such a way as to make me seem like a trigger happy killer? If the weapon is changed from S&W specs, I bet a good lawyer would jump on that to paint an unsavory image of me and my actions.

We know thousands upon thousands of weapons have trigger work done. Are we all at risk if we defend ourselves with these?

Click to expand...

And the only correct answer to your question is, "maybe, maybe not". The modification alone is probably not much of a liability on it's own, however, the totality of the circumstances surrounding any shoot will dictate whether or not any single aspect regarding your equipment becomes an issue in the end.

I have seen this question asked over and over. I say phoey.. people respond with conjecture and "I think".. neither of which has any bearing on reality. Until an actual documented case, the answer is I don't know...

But... I will say... .... I have a CCW carry license, that is a fact, I have the right to protect myself with my weapon of choice, that is also a fact. I know of no law that says I cannot make my weapon more functional. As long as I protect myself according to the law.... nor do I know of no law limiting me to any particular ammo. No where does it say I can only injure a perp. to protect myself... thats a fact.. ok, back to Terminator 3....

You can justify most mods, just don't engrave "minority killer" on it.

as far as getting more charges, probably not. getting sued however, after the fact. yeah, id watch out.

sipowicz said:

You can justify most mods, just don't engrave "minority killer" on it.

Click to expand...

haha, +1. Post-of-the-Day candidate right there. On that note, you might also want to leave the custom "Punisher" skull grips off your carry 1911.

Whenever someone asks this question I always wonder how they determined that your gun was modified. Or that you might be shooting reloads. I can see that it's not impossible but how likely is it really?

turbo38gn said:

. I have a CCW carry license,

Click to expand...

Here in RI that CCW license allows you to carry concealed but says nothing about using !
Dave

RufusG said:

Whenever someone asks this question I always wonder how they determined that your gun was modified. Or that you might be shooting reloads. I can see that it's not impossible but how likely is it really?

Click to expand...

About 100% in a civil suit, with expert examination of the gun and ballistic testing of the ammo.

The OSBI also investigates every shooting in OK, and has an expert lab available to examine to any extent deemed relevant in the particular case. They even examine accidental shootings including to determine if the gun was modified and/or faulty.

There is a case ongoing now that arose because because of conflicting stories and a camera tape, and has grown into a full criminal case with full forensics testing. They have gone to the extent of trying to determine exactly which shot was fatal and when death occurred, from which gun. A murder charge has been filed.

In another case of a home invasion, the investigation was short and simple, shooting justified, closed.

boingboing's response(post #10) is highly instructive and probably the one you'll most want to remember, since he has actually experienced these matters. It seems to me that anything I do to my SD gun to improve the odds of successfully protecting myself and my own from harm is not only legitimate, but the only reasonable thing to do. As others here have indicated, however, one's opponent in the courtroom isn't trying to be reasonable, but to win. What to do? All of us must decide for ourselves, I guess.

Andy