jarhead1178
US Veteran
I shoots em the way I buys them.
Gun Trigger Modifications a No Go According to Article
- Thread starter marathonrunner
- Start date
I am not exactly sure what that is supposed to mean but in this discussion we are supposed to be the good guys. However, and let's be clear on this, if you shoot someone and do not kill that perpetrator and he testifies that he never threatened you then you are quite likely going to have to argue and prove that you're the victim - which is why you do not do things to your guns that can be used against you.
And unless you're using a single action pistol or revolver you NEVER cock the hammer; the accidental discharge that can happen might be the one that turns your perpetrator into your victim. With a single action gun you have to do it so it's justified. So don't make that trigger too light!
***GRJ***
Mcwsky09
Member
I think there is a common misconception that our legal system is designed to get to the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth when in fact it is an adversarial system in which each side is trying to get the best deal it can for it client. While this is supposed to be done via a process of evaluating evidence and testimony to get to the truth in many cases there is no objective way to arrive at the entire truth in all detail - especially when it comes to determining the state of mind or intention of those involved during the incident.
Rastoff
US Veteran
So, you're saying that carrying a 1911 in condition 1 (chamber loaded, hammer cocked, safety on) is a bad idea?
Rastoff, Hapworth got it right. It's exactly what I did NOT say.
But I wasn't talking about carrying, either. The discussion was more about justification for self defense shooting, and the assumption being made was that you had no choice but to draw and point your handgun at a perpetrator. In which case, your 1911 or similar pistol or SAA or similar revolver requires cocking to be useful.
OTOH, however, for clarity and because I am an instructor and a lawyer, I will say this for the 1911 and Hi-Power fans (and similar guns; there are a few others out there) - TRAIN TRAIN TRAIN! Carrying a single action pistol cocked and locked/Condition 1 is not for the untrained shooter.
Personally, however, and it's really a whole other thread, I do consider carrying a 1911 in Condition 1 a bad idea unless you are VERY WELL TRAINED. I am not a speed shooter or athletic but give me a 1911 and I'll accept anyone's challenge to shoot for scores - or a Hi-Power (I'll be happy to bring mine; I don't have any 1911s any more, not presently). Or I can use my Vaqueros. As long as speed is not a requirement.
Carrying a single action pistol in Condition 1 is, to my way of thinking, preparatory to a gunfight. If you're not knowingly headed to a gunfight (like a Soldier or a law officer - whose daily business is being prepared for a gunfight) I think single actions in Condition 1 are actually a bad idea in 2014. But that has NOTHING whatever to do with the context we were in. I just don't want to be seen advocating Condition 1 - I do not advocate it and believe me I have carried single action pistols.
Take this to another thread or email and I'll be glad to discuss it further but not here.
***GRJ***
But I wasn't talking about carrying, either. The discussion was more about justification for self defense shooting, and the assumption being made was that you had no choice but to draw and point your handgun at a perpetrator. In which case, your 1911 or similar pistol or SAA or similar revolver requires cocking to be useful.
OTOH, however, for clarity and because I am an instructor and a lawyer, I will say this for the 1911 and Hi-Power fans (and similar guns; there are a few others out there) - TRAIN TRAIN TRAIN! Carrying a single action pistol cocked and locked/Condition 1 is not for the untrained shooter.
Personally, however, and it's really a whole other thread, I do consider carrying a 1911 in Condition 1 a bad idea unless you are VERY WELL TRAINED. I am not a speed shooter or athletic but give me a 1911 and I'll accept anyone's challenge to shoot for scores - or a Hi-Power (I'll be happy to bring mine; I don't have any 1911s any more, not presently). Or I can use my Vaqueros. As long as speed is not a requirement.
Carrying a single action pistol in Condition 1 is, to my way of thinking, preparatory to a gunfight. If you're not knowingly headed to a gunfight (like a Soldier or a law officer - whose daily business is being prepared for a gunfight) I think single actions in Condition 1 are actually a bad idea in 2014. But that has NOTHING whatever to do with the context we were in. I just don't want to be seen advocating Condition 1 - I do not advocate it and believe me I have carried single action pistols.
Take this to another thread or email and I'll be glad to discuss it further but not here.
***GRJ***
shouldazagged
Absent Comrade
I await the tsunami...
Take The Wind Out of Their Sails
Also taught in Lawyering-101: If you think something is going to hurt you on cross examination, then bring it out on direct testimony. In most instances, it deflates the issue and if the other side still raises it, the jury yawns, thinking we've already heard this.
Your lawyer may discern by pre-trial motions, examinations before trial, requests for discovery, etc, just where the other side intends to go. If your hand loaded Strike'm-deader-than-dead (according to the other side) ammo is going to become an issue, raise it on direct testimony so them terrible prosecutors and plaintiffs' attorneys can't use it as a lurid revelation.
Also taught in Lawyering-101: If you think something is going to hurt you on cross examination, then bring it out on direct testimony. In most instances, it deflates the issue and if the other side still raises it, the jury yawns, thinking we've already heard this.
Your lawyer may discern by pre-trial motions, examinations before trial, requests for discovery, etc, just where the other side intends to go. If your hand loaded Strike'm-deader-than-dead (according to the other side) ammo is going to become an issue, raise it on direct testimony so them terrible prosecutors and plaintiffs' attorneys can't use it as a lurid revelation.
Last edited:
