curtmini14
Member
the guns i bought came like that how would i know any differant.
Legal issues to consider regarding gun mod's for carry weapons.
- Thread starter CaptRon956
- Start date
- Status
Absalom
SWCA Member, Absent Comrade
Basically, this, although "all nonsense" might be a bit strong.
If you do want to worry about this, criminal charges wouldn't be my main concern. In a wrongful death civil lawsuit, which can very easily come your way even if you're cleared in the shooting, some clever attorney is much more likely to try to use something like this to portray you as "prone to violence" or "eager to shoot"; in those kinds of trials, with the much lower evidence threshold, you don't really have to be wrong, you just have to look bad enough to the jury. Some Super Duper Close Quarter Battle Pistol ain't gonna help there.
I carry high-quality Smith & Wesson revolvers that don't need any mods, loaded with high-quality ammo from Federal or Hornady that says Defense on the box in big letters, and kill two birds with one gun: I'm well-protected and just don't worry about this stuff.
Admit nothing.
Deny everything
Make counter-accusations.
Nah, I don't think there has ever been a case that hinged on an intentionally modified gun if it was a good shoot. But I have a couple of target guns I'll nrver carry because of trigger pull weight.
Deny everything
Make counter-accusations.
Nah, I don't think there has ever been a case that hinged on an intentionally modified gun if it was a good shoot. But I have a couple of target guns I'll nrver carry because of trigger pull weight.
southcoast
Member
The brick of 22lr is available for criminal or civil case.
shouldazagged
Absent Comrade
Perhaps I'm excessively cautious, but for some years I've carried a DAO J-frame in .38 Special. The trigger pull has not been lightened, only smoothed a bit. It's not one of those dreaded fire-breathing magnums that strike terror and revulsion to the hearts of the antis. It holds five rounds, not a 30-round "clip". It isn't <shudder!> black.
One of the several reasons I chose it was the belief that it's as nearly attorney-proof as any gun I could carry.
I pray I never have to use it, and that if I were forced to it would be ruled to be justified. But I assume there would be a civil suit to follow, and I most emphatically don't want to make that easy for the plaintiff's lawyers.
Fortunately, I don't feel inadequately armed carrying it, and I like and trust it.
One of the several reasons I chose it was the belief that it's as nearly attorney-proof as any gun I could carry.
I pray I never have to use it, and that if I were forced to it would be ruled to be justified. But I assume there would be a civil suit to follow, and I most emphatically don't want to make that easy for the plaintiff's lawyers.
Fortunately, I don't feel inadequately armed carrying it, and I like and trust it.
OMG!
OMG You SMOOTHED the trigger? Doesn't that mean that you want to smoothly kill anybody that bothers you?
Prosecutor:
"THIS WOMAN WAS KILLED BY AN AUTOMATIC REVOLVER WITH A HAIRPIN TRIGGER THAT HAD BEEN INTENTIONALLY SMOOTHED TO MAKE IT EASIER TO KILL HER VICTIM"
Low information people:
"Oh my....Isn't that just awful....all guns should be banned."
I grin for now, anyway.
OMG You SMOOTHED the trigger? Doesn't that mean that you want to smoothly kill anybody that bothers you?
Prosecutor:
"THIS WOMAN WAS KILLED BY AN AUTOMATIC REVOLVER WITH A HAIRPIN TRIGGER THAT HAD BEEN INTENTIONALLY SMOOTHED TO MAKE IT EASIER TO KILL HER VICTIM"
Low information people:
"Oh my....Isn't that just awful....all guns should be banned."
I grin for now, anyway.
Absalom
SWCA Member, Absent Comrade
Of course, we could also offer that brick for any documented case where a modification to a good-quality gun turned out to be necessary to protect the owner. Might not be much easier to find a taker
.court cases are amazing. there is mis evidence (?) everywhere, shooting guns is competitive and people try to hit the target, and smooth and light trigger pull is to help with accuracy, if someone wanted to shoot someone a 50lb trigger pull would not stop them and a 1/2 pull would not help them. Money decides most court cases. This is America.
bmcgilvray
Member
I'm unconcerned about using handloads or about modifications. I'll leave this topic for others to dither over.
There's a story about Chicken Little running around crying: "The sky is falling."
There's a story about Chicken Little running around crying: "The sky is falling."
I've hesitated to post on this sort of thread, but ...
My LEO tag is from the judiciary side of the house. As a result, I can honestly say I have seen ludicrous and absurd arguments pollute clear and straight-forward situations.
I won't comment on the intelligence / stupidity (choose one) of modifying firearms. Just leave it to say I'll buy the weapon that, factory standard, is what I want. If I need to "fix" it, I'll sell it, and buy something better adapted, in a factory configuration.
I'll not step on anyone's ability to make factory items work better, but neither do I offer the least hope that a completely unbiased (and intelligent) jury will be chosen. I've dealt with many juries, and the jurors are a wildcard. The defense lawyers can only exclude so many blithering, slobbering, unemployed idiots who show up for the pay of a hopefully long trial.
I've been on juries. They forget to ask if I thought commission of a certain crime shouldn't be punished with public dismemberment or hanging. I remember ....
My LEO tag is from the judiciary side of the house. As a result, I can honestly say I have seen ludicrous and absurd arguments pollute clear and straight-forward situations.
I won't comment on the intelligence / stupidity (choose one) of modifying firearms. Just leave it to say I'll buy the weapon that, factory standard, is what I want. If I need to "fix" it, I'll sell it, and buy something better adapted, in a factory configuration.
I'll not step on anyone's ability to make factory items work better, but neither do I offer the least hope that a completely unbiased (and intelligent) jury will be chosen. I've dealt with many juries, and the jurors are a wildcard. The defense lawyers can only exclude so many blithering, slobbering, unemployed idiots who show up for the pay of a hopefully long trial.
I've been on juries. They forget to ask if I thought commission of a certain crime shouldn't be punished with public dismemberment or hanging. I remember ....
Rastoff
US Veteran
hoc9sw,
I appreciate your experience on this issue. I completely agree that we should expect juries to be made of those who won't comprehend the simplest of ideas.
However, the same question remains, can you tell us of even one case where a modified gun put someone in prison who would not have been put there had the gun not been modified? We've seen one case where a person was actually given a lighter sentence due to the gun being modified. Actually, in that case they didn't really know if the gun had been modified, it was just assumed.
I appreciate your experience on this issue. I completely agree that we should expect juries to be made of those who won't comprehend the simplest of ideas.
However, the same question remains, can you tell us of even one case where a modified gun put someone in prison who would not have been put there had the gun not been modified? We've seen one case where a person was actually given a lighter sentence due to the gun being modified. Actually, in that case they didn't really know if the gun had been modified, it was just assumed.
I can't (by legal restrictions of my job at the time) quote cases. And I can't say that a gun mod put someone in prison who should not have been there.
But I will say with certainty that anything "questionable" makes a trial more difficult, and the outcome equally difficult.
That which can't be an issue isn't one. Everything else ....
Just to say I've stood and listened to hours wasted on stupidity, while inflicting unknown impact on the idiots who could not find a way out of jury duty, or saw it as cash from the gods for a day paid for nothing.
What do those people hear ....
I've come to believe that no one can predict what a jury will decide. All one can do is stack the deck as much as possible in your favor.
Of course, one must still be alive to attend the hearing.
There is no answer other than do what you think is best, then consult an experienced attorney and ask them if you've made a wise choice.
After that, change your decision or go with it, you've done about all you can.
Whether or not you fine tune your gun, it's important to fine tune your lawyer!
Of course, one must still be alive to attend the hearing.
There is no answer other than do what you think is best, then consult an experienced attorney and ask them if you've made a wise choice.
After that, change your decision or go with it, you've done about all you can.
Whether or not you fine tune your gun, it's important to fine tune your lawyer!
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2006
- Messages
- 7,798
- Reaction score
- 7,228
I happen to hold the view that your trigger should be within factory specification. That doesn't mean some work can't be done, just that the factory determined the safe range of trigger weight for that firearm. A prudent individual stays within that range. That said:
Remember, whether criminal or civil trial, the jury will have NO gun owners on it. Hopefully, if your lawyer is doing their job, there won't be any members of gun control groups. Please do recall that while the standard of proof in criminal cases is beyond reasonable doubt, the civil standard is preponderance of the evidence.
Opposing counsel will/may use any modifications as reflecting upon your state of mind with respect to firearms use. As in the Fish vs Arizona (or the People or the name of the prosecutor-whatever the practice is) case, caliber can become an issue. As noted above, they'll bring all manner of things up. They are free to paint their narrative of what happened and why. Please note the description of the prospective jury above.
Can you refute the BS? In many cases a sharp attorney can do so with their own experts-if they're honest. . But, you can prepare in advance to refute the attacks. That may well prevent them. Is it always going to work? NO! Also remember you may have to pay for honest experts and they want their money up front.
To those who say a "good shoot is a good shoot" I offer two words: George Zimmerman. There are other examples.
There REALLY needs to be a sticky for this subject. The dead horse is down to bone fragments.
Marty Hayes knows his subject.
Remember, whether criminal or civil trial, the jury will have NO gun owners on it. Hopefully, if your lawyer is doing their job, there won't be any members of gun control groups. Please do recall that while the standard of proof in criminal cases is beyond reasonable doubt, the civil standard is preponderance of the evidence.
Opposing counsel will/may use any modifications as reflecting upon your state of mind with respect to firearms use. As in the Fish vs Arizona (or the People or the name of the prosecutor-whatever the practice is) case, caliber can become an issue. As noted above, they'll bring all manner of things up. They are free to paint their narrative of what happened and why. Please note the description of the prospective jury above.
Can you refute the BS? In many cases a sharp attorney can do so with their own experts-if they're honest. . But, you can prepare in advance to refute the attacks. That may well prevent them. Is it always going to work? NO! Also remember you may have to pay for honest experts and they want their money up front.
To those who say a "good shoot is a good shoot" I offer two words: George Zimmerman. There are other examples.
There REALLY needs to be a sticky for this subject. The dead horse is down to bone fragments.
Marty Hayes knows his subject.
Last edited:
Thankfully, nobody has ever killed anyone in a car accident while driving a vehicle with parts that increased horsepower, or quick shift transmissions that increased the ability to drive at higher speeds, or tinted windows, or huge wheels and tires, none them coming from the factory . . .
cmort666
Member
To those who say "George Zimmerman", I reply:
- NEVER talk to the police without benefit of legal counsel.
- If your lawyer tells you to keep your mouth shut, DO IT.
BTW - I don't recall the nature or condition of Zimmerman's firearm being an issue at trial. Of course he would have gotten himself up to his neck in sewage with a blue gun...
The ONLY time during a 30 year law enforcement career that I am personally aware of anything close to a gun mod being brought up in a shooting was by the SHOOTER who was trying to mitigate intent in a bad shooting. The guy shot someone he was not justified in shooting and then tried to call it an accident as opposed to pre-meditated murder by saying: "The gun just went off because the trigger was faulty."
A good shooting is a good shooting. I am not personally aware of any case where a person who shot another was either charged more seriously or charged at all due to a gun mod. Criminal-law speaking, a "good" shooting is a good shooting if the intent and justification are in the right places.
I'd be more afraid of "personalized" guns than I would "modified". For example grips with a death's head or even your initials or military-related themes. Once a prosecutor decides they can prove you guilty of a crime and a judge determines there is probable cause to charge you with a crime after a shooting, they will try to use EVERYTHING they can against you. A lighter trigger pull is not going to be a factor in charging you unless you bring it up as a defense. They MAY try to use it against you at trial, depending on the circumstances. "This gun nut loves his guns so much he even paid $400.00 for fancy animal bone grips! The walnut grips it came with weren't good enough because his gun had to be FANCY to show off at BBQ's!"
How about getting in "trouble" for FAILING to make a gun mod:
"So you decided to carry a factory Glock like the cops carry? Really? Like the cops carry? Did you modify it so that the trigger pull is heavier than factory like the cops did so it's safer? Or did you keep the factory hair trigger?"
A good shooting is a good shooting. I am not personally aware of any case where a person who shot another was either charged more seriously or charged at all due to a gun mod. Criminal-law speaking, a "good" shooting is a good shooting if the intent and justification are in the right places.
I'd be more afraid of "personalized" guns than I would "modified". For example grips with a death's head or even your initials or military-related themes. Once a prosecutor decides they can prove you guilty of a crime and a judge determines there is probable cause to charge you with a crime after a shooting, they will try to use EVERYTHING they can against you. A lighter trigger pull is not going to be a factor in charging you unless you bring it up as a defense. They MAY try to use it against you at trial, depending on the circumstances. "This gun nut loves his guns so much he even paid $400.00 for fancy animal bone grips! The walnut grips it came with weren't good enough because his gun had to be FANCY to show off at BBQ's!"
How about getting in "trouble" for FAILING to make a gun mod:
"So you decided to carry a factory Glock like the cops carry? Really? Like the cops carry? Did you modify it so that the trigger pull is heavier than factory like the cops did so it's safer? Or did you keep the factory hair trigger?"
Last edited:
bhayles
Member
Ya know, there is a middle ground between a stock trigger and a trigger that's been tricked out to the max. Mas Ayoob doesn't even say to leave the trigger alone. He says leave the pull weight above 4.5 lbs but that "crisping" and smoothing the trigger is just fine...say the Ghost Ranger trigger kit but not using the trigger springs in the kit, just the connector, for a Glock.
A lot of the discussion here has been along the lines of "show me case law where a light trigger got someone convicted" and the follow up that there is no such case law.
I doubt that is true, but for the moment I'll concede the possibility. Do you really want to be charged by an anti-gun zealot prosecutor who gets an indictment in a Grand Jury by using, in part, the "hair trigger, making the gun an easy killing tool" argument where your side has no say, sit in jail for a year waiting for trial (a half million dollar cash bond is hard to meet) and then a reasonable jury fails to convict...
Did you REALLY win, despite the "not guilty" verdict?
As Ayoob says, tricked up guns are for the range and competition, not self-defense.
A lot of the discussion here has been along the lines of "show me case law where a light trigger got someone convicted" and the follow up that there is no such case law.
I doubt that is true, but for the moment I'll concede the possibility. Do you really want to be charged by an anti-gun zealot prosecutor who gets an indictment in a Grand Jury by using, in part, the "hair trigger, making the gun an easy killing tool" argument where your side has no say, sit in jail for a year waiting for trial (a half million dollar cash bond is hard to meet) and then a reasonable jury fails to convict...
Did you REALLY win, despite the "not guilty" verdict?
As Ayoob says, tricked up guns are for the range and competition, not self-defense.
Can you point out a newspaper article where a "reasonable" person was charged in a shooting and received a half million dollar cash bond?!?! The thing to keep in mind in all things self defense is "reasonable". Normal guy reasonable...
I think that when the old "gun mod" hypothetical argument comes up, --and it's ALWAYS hypothetical, just as half of what the gun writers churn out is hypothetical-- we should also talk about the hypothetical shooting details that got the otherwise good and reasonable self defense shooter in the predicament of having to defend his gun mod choices in the first place. Just so we're all on the same page.
For example: "So this guy is sleeping in bed and a crackhead breaks into his house thinking he's not home....He shoots the crackhead and gets charged with murder because he had an action job on his 50 year-old revolver...."
Or...."So this guy comes home from work and finds his wife in bed with the neighbor and shoots both of them in the head and gets charged with manslaughter because he had an action job done on his revolver....and has to post a half million dollar cash bond to stay out of jail awaiting trial for a year...."
See what I mean? "Reasonable....."
Last edited:
bhayles
Member
"Normal guy reasonable" only applies once at trial, convincing a jury that your actions were that of "a reasonable person", the standard in most states. I'll agree that, at trial, you'd be found not guilty.
I want to avoid the **** between indictment and trial.
- Status
