Justifiable is justifiable

Well guys I guess what it comes down to is risk management. Undoubtedly a personal choice. We all have to choose the extent we will alter our lives to avoid a perceived or potential threat.
We can all ensure the vehicles we drive haven't been altered from their original stock equipment or configuration lest an atty. accuse us of intentionally creating a death machine, if we happen to be involved in an accident. A person who works out a lot or learns a martial art may be accused of intentionally turning themselves into a death machine should they be forced to protect themselves. Are you a member of the NRA? "We all know what that means, don't we?" Like to target shoot? " You're obviously preparing to use your deadly skill at your first opportunity, aren't you?" Enjoy watching "violent Sports"? "We all know what that means, don't we?". It can go on and on. The truth is most of these things are not an issue for us because we act reasonably but that doesn't mean the allegations can't be made.
I am usually armed when I'm out and about. Someone might make the allegation I'm looking to shoot someone. Not true but the allegation could be made. I will continue to carry. Someone could allege that I practice shooting at (gasp!) silhouette targets because I hope to shoot a human. Not true but the allegation could be made. I will continue my practice. Most, if not all, of these risks could be avoided if I would only conform to what an "average person" does. I will continue to be me and do what I think best. As should we all. If I choose to have a smoother trigger on my gun I will accept that risk and have an "action job".
Stay safe and well.
 
Don't think anyone was trying to make trouble, I'm sure we all stand for your right to do whatever ya want. I was only trying to say be aware of the possible consequences, I'm sure everyone else was as well.
 
Switch the Line of Thought

I am always amazed at the number of handgun owners who are constantly talking about shooting someone and the consequences as may result because they have either modified their firearm or are using ammunition that is clearly intended to totally destroy whatever it hits. In many instances the discussions involve "get the bad guys" "head shoot the zombies" or other such scenarios trying to make the act of shooting someone a "sport" or an act of passage of puberty.
As someone who has had to pull a trigger in actual combat I have always considered the act of shooting someone a personal catastrophe that tears at your insides no matter how "justifiable".
I am fortunate that although in combat I put my share of rounds into the "enemy" I have never had to actually look one in the eye before I pulled the trigger. The act of killing another human being is always a tremendous shock to one's moral fiber. It is useless to pretend otherwise----it will devastate you no matter how terrible, ugly or worthless the other guy might be.

Those who carry concealed weapons other than LEOs who think this is a sport that simply requires abiding by the rules need to grow up and recognize the effect it will have on them forever--not from the law but from their own conscience. To shoot or not to shoot is a decision that can haunt you forever.
 
I write into our local newspaper comments section almost daily, and though I don't believe folks here are as you say "sport"y about shooting someone- I can't count the number of people in those comments that say stuff like " I woulda put two in his head" or "I woulda blown his stupid brains out." "They wouldn;t need an ambulance but a coroner if he tried to rob ME."
Sometimes I try and educate- sometimes it's obviously wasted breath- or - typing.
 
The issue of trigger pull has been touched on, but the manufacturer establishes a range of trigger pull that's acceptable. The service manual will, for example, set it as " acceptable range 4.5 to 6 lgs for single action" for a TDA pistol. Further reading will show that if the trigger is less than minimum it's considered unsafe and remedial action must be performed to return it to standard.

Now, someone decides, that the factory pull is excessively heavy and gets it reduced below factory standard. This will be determined, as noted by another, during the inspection of the weapon following any shooting and noted in the report. The DA now has documentation that you intentionally created an unsafe condition with your firearm.

Remember that you're about to claim that in your judgement, the situation you faced placed you in mortal danger that could only be resolved by an application of deadly force. Think that the trigger work couldn't possibly call the quality of your judgement into question????? Recall as I noted earlier, you're betting your house & retirement on this.

The folks who note those who say stupid things have a point also. If you've made it a habit to comment that if "someone breaks into my house, I'll light 'em up!", you might want to reconsider those comments. Should you ever have the misfortune to actually have to shoot a home invader, it won't take a whole lot of time for the investigators to find folks who'll remember those comments. Regardless of exactly how justified you may have been, it's not gonna look real good. In fact, it's gonna look an awful lot like premeditated homicide.
 
Last edited:
So post some real world examples of these things being issues. Between the cops, lawyers and google hounds here, surely someone has at least a dozen examples of otherwise justified shootings that wound up with the shooter being prosecuted because of his gun mods.

I don't think the criminal justice world is nearly as nefarious as some people would like to believe. In fact, the only cases I'm personally familiar with where someone tried to make an issue of gun modifications were situations were the shooting was already "bad" and the defendant tried to raise the issue of trigger pull or an unsafe gun or whatever in order to discredit the prosecution's claim that he had the requisite intent to fulfill the elements of a particular specific intent crime. For example: "I didn't MEAN to shoot him, the faulty gun went off by itself. I'm guilty of involuntary manslaughter, not first degree murder...."
 
Last edited:
I've read a lot of opinions here. It is a little confusing. Is there any actual data from studies on the legal effect of modifications of a carry weapon on the outcome of a trial? Logic and supposition don't really help much.

Unlike most here on this forum, I don't have a corral full of weapons to pick from. I use my MP9FS for target and fun shooting so it is primarily a loud paper punch. It's my weapon of choice, although the Remington .44 makes a bigger hole and a big cloud of smoke to hide in.

I modified the trigger (APEX sear and safety block) to make the rough trigger smooth and to help with the low and left shooting. I don't see how a modification made to improve accuracy can be used against you, especially a modification that helps limit collateral damage and keeps the round count down.

I know it will be pointed out by a prosecutor, but your own lawyer does get to talk and show that you have 10,000 rounds into paper for every round in self defense, and that in a fight for your life, the difference between a 4.5lb trigger and a 12lb trigger is pretty meaningless. You will not be squeezing off carefully, you will be sweeping of rounds quickly at center mass and hoping the training time helps.

Regarding Fred coming through the window-first time would also be the last time. Let the dog apply aversive behavior modifications, followed up with bat or golf stick. He's a drunk and needs help to quit drinking. Pain should help.
 
Ayoob has adressed this issue- and hot ammo- many times, here is one of his 'Chronicles', a 6-part thing, in which he explains several times how prosecutors can twist and turn events, facts, and how they do exactly that. This particular set of writings didn't have so many cases shown like "smith vs Moore" or anything- but I mean really, the man writes over and over 'I testified in this trial.." and unless you just want to decide he's lying to ya, I don't think his writings leave any doubt. He seems to say a smoother trigger MAY not be a problem, but a LIGHTER trigger most certainly can be used against you. He even talks about using hollow points, and how prosecutors HAVE called them 'dum dums' to the jury, to convince juries you were irresponsible, or out to kill. Yall remember how we should never say we shot to kill, only to stop the threat- well, a prosecutor can and has) say if you only wanted to stop him, why did you use such deadlly ammo? I understand wanting to improve your gun, I want to myself- but not my carry gun- it's not that I'm afraid of being convicted- I am afraid of being accused- that's all it takes to send you to the poor house. Paying lawyers, maybe being locked up awaiting trial and losing time from work- or my job- all because I wanted a better trigger, when the one I hahve works fine.
The Massad Ayoob Chronicles, Part I | The Truth About Guns
or try this
http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1329799
 
Last edited:
Did you ever look at the real world police experience that Ayoob has? He may be a good researcher or information compiler but to consider him as "on the job"....well.....there's "on the job" and there's "on the job". Again, post some real world cases where gun mods have turned an otherwise justified shooting into a criminal conviction.....

I really love New Hampshire, but here's the activity report from Ayoob's department for last month. Keep in mind that August is often one of the busiest months for police work, typically, and that Mr. Ayoob is a part timer here. Really, now much "on the job" experience does he have? Post some real world examples of people being charged with crimes because of gun mods in otherwise justified shootings.

http://www.granthamnh.net/vertical/...A-19873AF96E35}/uploads/August_2012_stats.pdf

Gun writers have to live by the same dictum as college professors: "Publish or perish". Keep that in mind.

I wouldn't modify my self-defense gun simply because in a self-defense shooting trigger smoothness or fancy sights aren't going to mean jack. In a target pistol it may be a different story. That doesn't mean I'm going to hesitate using my target pistol for self defense if necessary because the trigger is light.
 
Last edited:
It's sad that in a country like ours an innocent man can go to prison for protecting himself and his family due to the broken legal system we have today. It's almost at the point where people are more scared about notifying the authorities then they are about the perpetrator in the first place. Might be better off burying a bad guy in the woods then letting the judicial system get involved. Either way your going to be punished. Let's be honest, CA is here to steal our money and our rights. 2 birds with one stone seems to be their favorite method. (don't worry, I'm moving out of this state very, very soon)
 
He writes in one of the gun magazines, I don't have time to go back through them, it might be HANDGUNS I'm not sure- but he has named the cases in those articles, when I have time I'll see what I can find. But my point was, I have no reason to doubt him- he testified in most of the cases and simply relayed what had happened.
 
One of the cases someone was writing about, I think it was the "Fish" case had very little to do with what the point they were trying to make, in my opinion. There was another case involving reloads where any connection to the reload and prosecution was very tenuous at best, but the flavor of the article was that the guy was prosecuted because he used reloads. Not true from what I read of the case.

As far as what is written in the gun rags when it comes to criminal law and trials.....I'd rather read the transcripts and decide for myself rather than read ONE expert's opinion on the case when there are always experts for the other side whose opinions are just as credible, if not more.

Either way your going to be punished.
Click to expand...

I've investigated probably over 100 shootings and I've never seen any "innocent" people punished for justifiable shootings based on the evidence. Of course if you ASK them, they were ALL innocent.

but I mean really, the man writes over and over 'I testified in this trial.." and unless you just want to decide he's lying to ya, I don't think his writings leave any doubt.
Click to expand...

I guarantee there was another expert for the other side in every trial in which he testified who said something that contradicted his opinion. Was that expert lying? The only thing being an expert means in court is that you're allowed to offer your opinion as testimony. It doesn't mean your testimony is any more or less credible than the inevitable expert who is testifying to the OPPOSITE of what you said...
 
Last edited:
What if the DA says...

"You intended to shoot SOMEBODY...
that's the reason you obtained a concealed carry permit...
isn't it!

Oh.. well.
 
Old cop said:
This is most likely due to following the rules during my 30 yr. LEO days (this was drilled into our heads) but beyond changing the grips, I do not modify a self defense gun. I learn to use it out of the box, carry quality factory self defense ammo and hope I never have to use it.
Click to expand...
Or carry Critical Duty a "police" round instead of the "appropriate" Critical Defense ammo and see what the prosecutor does.
 
What if the DA says...

"You intended to shoot SOMEBODY...
that's the reason you obtained a concealed carry permit...
isn't it!

Oh.. well.
Click to expand...

"Yes, when he implied that he was going to kill me if I didn't give him my wallet, I intended to shoot him. He intended to KILL me and I intended to SHOOT him. I'm glad you made that distinction Mr. Prosecutor."
 
Chances are very, very good that if a prosecutor is asking you questions in court as a defendant, you're guilty of a crime and your shooting was not justified in the first place. Before you get to that point, an assistant prosecutor reviewed the case that the detective wrote up, his boss reviewed the case and depending on the circumstances, the head county prosecutor reviewed it to not only determine if there was probable cause for an arrest but ALSO, and this "also" is often overlooked, if the case can likely be proved beyond a reasonable doubt in front of a judge or jury, and then decided to recommend a warrant. Then a judge reviewed the warrant and signed it. Then another judge reviewed the charges at a preliminary exam and decided whether there was enough evidence for charges. Then the case was bound over to trial where various motions and hearings took place before your case even got close to trial.

If it gets to that point, your shooting was very, very, very, very questionable at BEST, if not downright criminal.

Now, if you were dumb and/or unfortunate enough to get into a political shooting where you killed a minister or cop or girl scout while trying to stop an imaginary robbery in front of your house, things could be different. But for the most part.......People involved in justified shootings are rarely charged, let alone tried.

And, no, the prosecutor may NOT ask you anything in court. There are rules that BOTH sides must follow.
 
The bottom line is, there are relatively few things over which we have complete control when it comes to a situation where we must use deadly force. Of those things, we pretty much have complete control over how much and what type of training we seek out and attend, how much and how frequent we practice the things we've learned in our training, the make/model/caliber of firearm we carry, the ammunition we select to carry in it, the type of peripheral gear we use (belts, holster, spare mags/speeloaders, flashlights, knives, etc), and ultimately, the attitude and mindset we have at any given moment in time. That's about it, as far as "absolutes" are concerned.

We do NOT get a choice of time or place, we do NOT get to choose the size or number of our adversary(ies), we do NOT get to choose the proximity of bystanders or innocents that could potentially become collateral damage, we do NOT get to choose what type of weapon(s) our adversary will be armed with or at what distance it (they) will be deployed, we do NOT get to choose how the dynamic situation will unfold and how our responses to it will be interpreted by others who might be around or others who might watch a single-point-of-view of the incident on some surveillance video, in addition to countless other variables over which we have absolutely no control.

With this being a "known", in my view, it doesn't make sense to "play loose" or take unnecessary risks with the few things over which we DO have complete control. There is so much room for potential problems from the things over which we have no control, that it simply doesn't make sense to KNOWINGLY take risks with the things over which we do. Of course, YMMV.
 
[
I guarantee there was another expert for the other side in every trial in which he testified who said something that contradicted his opinion. Was that expert lying? The only thing being an expert means in court is that you're allowed to offer your opinion as testimony. It doesn't mean your testimony is any more or less credible than the inevitable expert who is testifying to the OPPOSITE of what you said...[/QUOTE]

Yeh but see, the fact is it was brought up in a trial- exactly what we have been advising about- those issues would not have even been brought up with a stock weapon/ammo. I've said alla long it doesn't matter if it's a good shoot, and he gets off in the end- if a DA uses it, it's because he could- and did. I don't want to give them that ammo. The DA takes him to trial for shooting someone- in SD- that's bad enough, but he IS going to use every bit of info he can to sway the jury- modified weapon, 'dangerous' ammo? I won't give them THAT.
I don't agree with any of it- it's either SD or it's not- and I'm not gonna go look up those cases- I don't really care that much. Each to his own- and best of luck. We pray none of us ever need to worry about it in the first place. Take it easy partner.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Case hardening depth on S&W hammers and triggers
Replies
7
Views
493
halfmoonclip
H
B
3913 Dumb question...
2 3
Replies
47
Views
4K
Phenix
P
D
S&W 6906, Glocks and P320's for Carry
2
Replies
26
Views
1K
WRscott
W
A
908 Price?
Replies
11
Views
834
cherrypointmarine
cherrypointmarine
chief38
Today we all shot our M60's (snub nose day at the range)
Replies
8
Views
549
Cal. Det. 1989
C

Latest posts

Back
Top