Legal issues to consider regarding gun mod's for carry weapons.

[CaptRon956]

This applies only to pistols used for the sole purpose of self defense/conceal carry.... I know a lot of guys own M&P shields & similar for use as CC/SD and mod them however I never thought about those mods being brought up in court if used to defend my life... But they can be used against you.

I thought this was a interesting read & important topic to discuss & would like to hear input from other gun owners & mostly from those who are in law enforcement & hold CC permits.
I own a shield 9 & M&P .380, they are completely stock. These are duty/service grade weapons. I agree with the author, "if you dont like the trigger pull or feel on a particular gun, get a different gun". This is why time spent at the range is vital. Get to know your weapon...

Gun Modifications, Light Triggers and Reloaded Ammunition

 

[Grayfox]

Oh boy, here we go again.

 

[cmort666]

1. I'm not a cop.
2. I don't have qualified immunity.
3. I don't have a union backing me up.
4. I don't have a bottomless pit of taxpayer money to pay settlements and judgments.

I simply can't afford to substitute a 20lb. trigger and a magazine safety for accuracy and good judgment.

Here in Ohio, if somebody kicks in my door at 3:00am or tries to carjack me on the way from home, nobody's going to worry about whether I had a 3.5lb. Ghost connector in my Glock 19 (which I do). They're going to care if I adhered to Ohio deadly force law.

1. Was I in reasonable and immediate fear of life and limb?
2. If I wasn't in home or vehicle, did I ATTEMPT to RETREAT (ONLY if possible in PERFECT SAFETY)?
3. Did I cease the use of deadly force when the threat was neutralized?

I am VASTLY more concerned that I might miss and shoot the wrong person because of some garbage "NY trigger" than I'll EVER be that I got prosecuted because I shot somebody with a Glock with a 3.5lb. connector, who kicked in my door and tried to rob or murder me.

 

[Alk8944]

The theory behind the concern to modifications of self-defense forearms is that they could possibly be construed as showing "prior intent" of the actor in a self-defense situation. Both defense and prosecuting attorneys have been known to jump on anything they can to strengthen their case, whether germane to the issues at hand or not. Witness the Arizona case where a man was convicted of murder in what otherwise was a straight-forward self-defense situation. The prosecution focused on the proposition that the shooter's carrying of a 10mm automatic, a pistol more powerful that what the Police used, was evidence of the prior intent of the shooter to kill someone if the situation presented itself! The un-initiated jury bought the argument! ***

The real concern comes when a trigger pull, single or double-action, of the firearm has been lightened below its' factory pull weight and the shooter makes the claim that the shooting was accidental. "I didn't mean to shoot, the gun just went off!" , in the mistaken belief that a claim of an accidental discharge will in some way tend to exonerate him. In every case you need to be absolutely sure that you intended to discharge the gun, and that given the same set of facts a reasonable man would have made the same decision! The prosecution will contend that by modifying the revolver you have set up the "accidental discharge" situation by negligently making the gun unsafe by modifying it from its' factory condition. This could apply whether you or a professional did the modifications.

If you want to modify a gun for target use go right ahead. For a self-defense handgun you can change sights, grips, or anything else that doesn't affect function or safety, but don't touch the trigger.

*** I believe he was eventually exonerated on appeal, does anyone have any factual information on this?

 

[cmort666]

The real concern comes when a trigger pull, single or double-action, of the firearm has been lightened below its' factory pull weight and the shooter makes the claim that the shooting was accidental. "I didn't mean to shoot, the gun just went off!" , in the mistaken belief that a claim of an accidental discharge will in some way tend to exonerate him.

That's not a justification for having the worst, creepiest, heaviest trigger you can it. It's a justification for:

1. having good judgment.
2. having good gun handling skills.
3. not talking to the police without benefit of counsel.

If I shoot somebody, it's going to be on purpose and I will maintain that it was on purpose right down the line. My having a firearm with which I can hit my intended target rather than bystanders is an indication that I have a predisposition to defend myself rather than shoot uninvolved third parties.

Somebody else's lousy judgment, poor gun handling skills, and inability to keep his mouth shut do not confer upon me a duty to have a firearm with which I couldn't hit the ocean from the deck of the U.S.S. Ronald Reagan.

 

[model70hunter]

Reloads? When I was a deputy I reloaded warm 38 special wad cutters. One highway patrolman asked if I had any extra ones where the wad cutter had accidently been put in backwards. Like those in my mod 36 backup. Thought he was gonna get on me for carrying them on duty. I said maybe. He said bring me 6 rounds for his 36. The other patrol boys also got some. The head patrol feller was my neighbor, he taught me how to reload. He trusted them.

My how times have changed.

 

[Rastoff]

This question/topic comes up regularly. The only way to look at it is through case law. We can speculate all we want, but the only thing that matters is what happens in the court room.

So, can anyone point to any case where a modified gun, any modification, was significant to a conviction? There was a case mentioned above, but it wasn't a modified gun, just a particular caliber (and the case wasn't cited). Until I see case law showing that a modified gun put someone in prison, I will come down on the side of - do whatever is necessary to help you shoot better. Saving your life, or the lives of your family, is far more important than worrying about what a jury might do.

 

[southcoast]

01-14-2015, 11:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jboutfishn View Post
Not a lawyer, but why would any trigger modification make a difference when considering an intentional discharge?
Your instincts are correct. There has never been an actual court case where a trigger modification became a relevant issue after an intentional shooting. There never will be. You will get many responses claiming over zealous prosecutors, uninformed jurors, expert testimony, Mas Ayoob, and many other speculative hypotheticals, but no one will provide the citation to an actual court case where this has come to fruition. It just wont happen. One brick of 22lr on me to the first actual citation.
Last edited by southcoast; 01-14-2015 at 11:44 PM.

The brick of 22lr is still available.

 

[mc5aw]

Much of the argument is based on hypothetical perception of a given firearm by a potential prosecutor and jury. Without legal precedent, there's little to nothing to support a theory that modifications will make an innocent person look guilty.

Personally speaking, I think Punisher grips, etc. are needless accoutrements ... not much different than oh so clever vanity plates that tweak LEOs like "CEE-YA", "ZOOM", and "FSTWHLS". I wouldn't want to get caught with Punisher grips after a shooting any more than getting pulled over with "CTCH-ME" as a car tag.

Modifications that enhance the reliability, safety, and performance of a firearm serve to make it better ... in a life or death scenario, I want my firearm to be the best ... and can be argued as strongly by an attorney as against.

Years ago, I had a new Model 49 that came with a factory truck clutch for a trigger. I sent it back to S&W to have the trigger pull "lightened" ... it was returned so light that I felt uncomfortable with it. Sent it back a second time and had it restored to original specs.

If the day comes when a person needs to use a firearm for self defense, operational modifications won't be a priority concern unless the firearm fails.

 

[rwsmith]

I would say that....

Any mods to the frame or sight was to make the gun more controllable if an emergency arose and more concealable to be more in compliance with concealed carry laws. The trigger pull if used outside your house could be a sticky point, but I agree that knowing your weapon is the first step in being effective and safe and if you aren't satisfied with the level that you achieve, modify the trigger. Who thinks a person should carry a gun they can't control well?

Anyway, all of my guns at this time are stock. Let the jury pull the trigger on my 3rd gen and see if it's too light. It's not, but I've gotten used to it and use it just fine. Now my 686 in single action is a different story.

 

[williamlayton]

Rubbish speculation, same as in my old dope smoking days when we contemplated the universe or why the grass was growing in certain patterns.
Good conversation without any fruit.
Blessings

 

[cowart]

There has never been an actual court case where a trigger modification became a relevant issue after an intentional shooting.

Here is such a case:

People v. Superior Court (Du) (1992) 5 CA4th 822

"The court commented at sentencing that it did not "believe that Mrs. Du would be here today if the gun that she grabbed for protection had not been altered." The court elaborated: "This was a gun that had been stolen from the Du family and had been returned to them shortly before the shooting. The court has been presented with no evidence, and I do not believe that Mrs. Du knew that the gun had been altered in such a way as to ... make it an automatic weapon with a hairpin trigger. Ordinarily a .38 revolver is one of the safest guns in the world. Ordinarily, a woman Mrs. Du's size would have to decide consciously to pull the trigger and exert considerable strength to do so, but that was not true of the gun used to shoot Latasha Harlins. I have serious questions in my mind whether this crime would have been committed at all but for the altered gun."

 

[Road Rat]

 

[loknload]

My guns work just like they were meant too right out of the box. In all my years of shooting and gun collecting I've never had to have a piece worked on or customized? They've always worked just the way they should!
Since I don't reload I shoot what I buy off the shelf, never had any problems with that either.
So I guess I have no problems!

 

[southcoast]

Here is such a case:

People v. Superior Court (Du) (1992) 5 CA4th 822

"The court commented at sentencing that it did not "believe that Mrs. Du would be here today if the gun that she grabbed for protection had not been altered." The court elaborated: "This was a gun that had been stolen from the Du family and had been returned to them shortly before the shooting. The court has been presented with no evidence, and I do not believe that Mrs. Du knew that the gun had been altered in such a way as to ... make it an automatic weapon with a hairpin trigger. Ordinarily a .38 revolver is one of the safest guns in the world. Ordinarily, a woman Mrs. Du's size would have to decide consciously to pull the trigger and exert considerable strength to do so, but that was not true of the gun used to shoot Latasha Harlins. I have serious questions in my mind whether this crime would have been committed at all but for the altered gun."

Here, the defendant claimed the shooting was unintentional, as well as the fact that the shooting was deemed not justified. Thus the trigger mod was also in material and not legally relevant as to actual determination of guilt. It was merely brought up during the sentencing phase.

 

[cowart]

Here, the defendant claimed the shooting was unintentional, as well as the fact that the shooting was deemed not justified. Thus the trigger mod was also in material and not legally relevant as to actual determination of guilt. It was merely brought up during the sentencing phase.

Actually, it made a big difference to the defendant! Instead of being convicted of murder1 and going to jail, the defendant got voluntary manslaughter, and no jail time.

"After conclusion of the testimony at trial, the court granted a defense motion to dismiss the charge of first degree murder. The jury was instructed {Page 5 Cal.App.4th 828} on second degree murder, two theories of voluntary manslaughter (sudden quarrel or heat of passion [CALJIC Nos. 8.42, 8.43 and 8.44] and honest but unreasonable belief in self-defense [CALJIC No. 5.17]), and involuntary manslaughter.
The jury found defendant guilty of voluntary manslaughter"

"The respondent court sentenced defendant to ten years in state prison (six years for the base term and four for the gun use). Sentence was suspended and defendant was placed on probation for a period of five years with the usual terms and conditions and on the condition that she pay $500 to the restitution fund and reimburse Latasha's family for any out-of-pocket medical expenses and expenses related to Latasha's funeral. Defendant was also ordered to perform 400 hours of community service. The court did not impose any jail time as a condition of probation."

 

[Muss Muggins]

So, if I'm reading these posts and the summary of the case from the link correctly, she got a lesser punishment because of the modification, which she didn't have done and didn't know about?

 

[Bajadoc]

All nonsense. Protect yourself, use good judgement. God forbid, get a good attorney.

 

[rwsmith]

A question and a comment..

Here is such a case:

People v. Superior Court (Du) (1992) 5 CA4th 822

"The court commented at sentencing that it did not "believe that Mrs. Du would be here today if the gun that she grabbed for protection had not been altered." The court elaborated: "This was a gun that had been stolen from the Du family and had been returned to them shortly before the shooting. The court has been presented with no evidence, and I do not believe that Mrs. Du knew that the gun had been altered in such a way as to ... make it an automatic weapon with a hairpin trigger. Ordinarily a .38 revolver is one of the safest guns in the world. Ordinarily, a woman Mrs. Du's size would have to decide consciously to pull the trigger and exert considerable strength to do so, but that was not true of the gun used to shoot Latasha Harlins. I have serious questions in my mind whether this crime would have been committed at all but for the altered gun."

Was there a conviction here?

Wouldn't this be considered an accident?

Note: 'Hairpin trigger' is inconsequential but "automatic weapon"????? It was a REVOLVER!

 

[Rastoff]

Yes, Muss has it right. In this case, the fact that the gun was modified actually reduced her sentence to probation rather than jail time. The modification to the gun was certainly a factor, but not in the way alluded to in the OP.

southcoast gets to keep the brick of .22s and we get to keep looking for a relevant case.