Legal implications of lock removal ?

[Wayne]

Just looking for specific info here, not whether or not you like the lock.

But are there any known cases of someone having the removal of a lock come up during a court proceding involving their revolver having the lock removed ?

 

[photoman]

None that I know of.

 

[diamonback68]

The only time it would come up is if the owner had left the gun unlocked, say in their home and a child or someone got ahold of an unlocked gun that had a lock removed and shot themselves or someone else with it. I don't think that has ever happened.
Otherwise if a person was legally carrying an unlocked or lock removed gun that would be normal, they wouldn't carry it locked.

 

[Leonard]

I have read and heard that when you modify a gun or use hand loads and are involved in a shooting that the prosecutor will attempt to use that against you. I believe Massad Ayoob who is an expert witness in firearms cases has written about this very issue.

I remember watching an actual trial on TV and the prosecutor convinced some of the jury members the 40 caliber gun was larger than what most police use and was proof the guy protecting himself just wanted to kill someone.

Other than that possibility there is no law against such a modification.

 

[WC145]

I think of it as the same as removing the tags from mattresses.

 

[snubbiefan]

Give any ambulance-chaser a chance and he will try and convince any jury that your Daisy BB pistol was over-kill.

(Hey Cajun....no harm intended.....it's your job.)

 

[Ashlander]

Prosecutors do their job and defense attorneys and jurors do theirs -- if your fellow citizens want to lock you up for shooting somebody with a 40 rather than a 9 -- we're in worse shape than I thought.

The most common modication that gets people into trouble is the hair trigger (especially with revolvers in single action). It makes the argument possible that the shooter did not so much intend to shoot but negligently discharged the firearm under stress (manslaughter). Accordingly, in any statement to the police the shooter has to insist that he or she intended to neutralize the threat -- "He came at me and I pulled the trigger." Never say, "the gun just went off."

Another common argument aside from modifications is that when a "good guy" shooter shoots a bad guy more than once, then the good guy went beyond self defense. Our argument has to be that in our training we learn to double or triple tap -- so that once we decide to pull the trigger, we have already decided to pull it 2 or 3 times and then to continue if the threat is still not neutralized.

On the flip side of modifcations that raise liability issues, many cop depts used to convert revolvers to double action only -- precisely to eliminate the potential negligent discharge possibility in single-action mode.

 

[Dennis The B]

The very first case in my commercial law class in the 1970's, involved an individual who tried using a lawn mower to trim his hedges. He lost several fingers in the process. He sued the manufacturer of the lawn mower, and the finding was upheld on appeal.

Never underestimate a jury's sympathy.

 

[photoman]

If you're going to worry about such things, just buy a gun without the lock.

 

[Steve in Vermont]

I own 3 guns with the IL but don't use any of them for cc. One concern I do have, for those removing the lock, doesn't have anything to do with liability while they own the gun but comes when they sell it. After the sale if a young person obtained the gun and was involved in an accidental shooting some attorney might suggest you sold a product with a safety feature removed. Sort of like selling a PTO with the shield removed, or an outboard motor with the kill switch missing.

 

[Ashlander]

The issue is not so much liability for a disabled lock, but as Diamonback said -- it's for somebody getting your gun and shooting himself or somebody else with it. If your gun is not secured or locked -- you'll have the same problem if somebody gets hold of it and uses it, internal lock or not. The jury question -- did you take reasonable efforts to secure your handgun against unauthorized access in order to prevent harm to somebody to whom you were legally obliged to safeguard?

 

[gaspipes]

People have been modifying guns since guns were invented. I have disabled the IL's on several guns, Rugers and others and I have disabled magazine safeties on several. I don't worry about it.

People used to pin the grip safeties on 1911's all the time. Guns were made for hundreds of years with no locks. Think of it as putting the guns back in their original condition. You changed the sights? Better to kill your victims with. Made the action smoother? Changed the grips? Yeah so you could kill more proficiently. There are a million things you could do to a gun that some jerk wad can say you did to improve your proficiency at killing.

The lawyers are going to do what they do.

I have not removed the IL from my S&W revolvers I have bought that have them. But if the lock was on one I carried for self defense, I wouldn't hesitate to remove it. My revolvers are range guns so I don't worry about the lock.

 

[tgd31968]

Whether it is changing springs or grips, i put the original parts in a baggie and store them away just in case I ever decide to sell it, I can return it to original.
Now, I just have to remember where I put all those things so I wouldn't lose them....

I own 3 guns with the IL but don't use any of them for cc. One concern I do have, for those removing the lock, doesn't have anything to do with liability while they own the gun but comes when they sell it. After the sale if a young person obtained the gun and was involved in an accidental shooting some attorney might suggest you sold a product with a safety feature removed. Sort of like selling a PTO with the shield removed, or an outboard motor with the kill switch missing.

 

[bmcgilvray]

Looks like worrisome dithering to me.

 

[DeafSmith]

Why not just put a stiffer spring in the lock. You can get to it by removing the sideplate and hammer. Might even just put a small cut down pin inside the spring to keep the lock from being turned.

Then, later if you want to sell the gun, just take the spring or pin out and put it back to normal.

My 642 and one of my 640-1's has what I call a child lock on them. Seems to run fine and I've examined how they work. TO me they are neither fish nor fowl.

 

[CAJUNLAWYER]

The very first case in my commercial law class in the 1970's, involved an individual who tried using a lawn mower to trim his hedges. He lost several fingers in the process. He sued the manufacturer of the lawn mower, and the finding was upheld on appeal.

Never underestimate a jury's sympathy.

Ding Ding Ding-we have a winna-I've seen juries do some strange s.....tuff over the years for even stranger reasons.

 

[Wayne]

HI all, I appreciate the comments from everyone, and actually nobody went "nuts" about the lock itself, and kept on the subject.

 

[stantheman86]

The Autralian PD trade-in 66-7's have all had the lock de-activated and it's not a big thing........

I asked a similiar question, as to opinions of whether an IL revolver with the lock removed should be used for HD and CC, and the common opinion was that there are millions of guns out there made without locks, and no one is getting in trouble for using them for HD and CC.......so a gun with a removed lock is no problem.

 

[CO_Kid]

I reckon you'd run into just as much trouble with removing the lock as you would with plain not using it.

To cut to the chase, basically only a money grubbing weasel personal injury attorney would try to use it when suing as another out in left field attempt to win.

 

[W.E.G.]

Whether it is changing springs or grips, i put the original parts in a baggie and store them away just in case I ever decide to sell it, I can return it to original.
Now, I just have to remember where I put all those things so I wouldn't lose them....

I recently got a sweet deal on a Ruger 3-screw Blackhawk with "parts missing."

Seems that somebody REMOVED THE CYLINDER, and of course "put it in a safe place" so the prior owner who now was suffering from progressive medical issues would not "do something" with the gun that everybody might regret.

We never found the original cylinder.

I have some of those "baggies" at my house too.

Boxes of baggies even.

I had to make a list.