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

Status
Not open for further replies.
First let me say that I appreciate all the posts in this thread. They have all been reasonable and intelligent.

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.
I would never ask you to do anything that would violate a trust. However, any case that has not been sealed is a matter of public record. I'm not asking for a quote. If you know a case, tell us what it is and we can look it up ourselves. Even so, I understand why you might not and I'm not trying to pressure you.

But I will say with certainty that anything "questionable" makes a trial more difficult, and the outcome equally difficult.
This is a given. Simple is better.

I happen to hold the view that your trigger should be within factory specification. That doesn't mean some work can't be done,...
Any work will be taken as a modification. By the logic used against modifying your gun, this is still a modification or change from how it came from the factory.

Remember, whether criminal or civil trial, the jury will have NO gun owners on it.
Not necessarily. Both sides get to pick the jury. Unless they can come up with a specific reason to exclude a juror, they can stay. Just being a gun owner would not exclude anyone.

Of course, one must still be alive to attend the hearing.
This is what should rule our efforts toward protection of self and family.

What I want to come out of this discussion is a knowledge that you don't have to carry a gun that you can't shoot well just because it isn't modified. The most important aspect of self-defense is to live through the encounter. Everything else is secondary.
 
"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.

I think normal guy reasonable starts before that. First, the cop on the street has to have probable cause that a crime was committed and you did it. I've dealt with many shootings where the shooter wasn't arrested at the scene because there was no probable cause to believe he committed a crime. Next, if the cop DOES arrest you on the spot, a prosecutor has to decide whether there is probable cause to believe a crime was committed, whether you did it AND whether they can PROVE it. This has to be done within 48 hours.

After that, if the prosecutor DOES determine all of the above, a judge has to agree with him. Only then is a warrant issued. After that, another judge has to determine whether there is probable cause to believe you committed a crime. That has to be done within two weeks whether you're in custody or not.....

After THAT, ANOTHER judge, now at the circuit court level, has to arraign you again. With all of this review and chances to review and reduce and modify bond, I've never heard of any "reasonable guy" getting a half million cash bond OR being charged and prosecuted BECAUSE he shot someone with a modified gun.
 
Any work will be taken as a modification. By the logic used against modifying your gun, this is still a modification or change from how it came from the factory.
Much of smoothing an action is the same thing as normal wear-which most armorers/smiths can tell a jury. Most people prefer to pay a smith a few bucks over burning lots of ammo. Even though the ammo consumption in directed practice would be a better investment.

Not necessarily. Both sides get to pick the jury. Unless they can come up with a specific reason to exclude a juror, they can stay. Just being a gun owner would not exclude anyone.
Premptatory challeges don't require reason.

What I want to come out of this discussion is a knowledge that you don't have to carry a gun that you can't shoot well just because it isn't modified.

Quite true and defensable. However, in historical terms, litterally millions of folks and critters have been dispatched quite handily by unmodified arms. There's a definate difference between real need and perceived need. Entirely too many use widgetry as a substitute for adequate training and practice.

Don't get me wrong, I see both sides of this. Before I started my present employment 27 years ago, I didn't own a stock firearm. Once I had employment where the all the arms were issued and used as manufactured, I came to realize that one (at least most of us) can use stock firearms quite well. Certainly sufficiently so for self defense. All it takes (barring disability) is more effort. The above comment about perceived need applies.
 
Last edited:
I'm not going to change any of y'all's minds on this, and I'm not trying to, but I do want to comment.

I've been around the firearms law block a couple times, and I still frequent the neighborhood. You don't have to give that statement any faith or credit. I'm not asking you to.

I read the news (the real news, not the commentary and supposition put forward in blogs and talk shows), and I follow current events. The potential prosecution scenarios put forward in this thread are implausible. Even the many blogs and personal commentary pages that act as authorities on this matter that I've come across by using a search engine admit as much. It's not realistic, and quite frankly a little bit paranoid, to spend your waking nights thinking about spending a year in jail because you installed a laser sight, a wolf spring kit, and a different connector and then legitimately used that firearm in self defense. The stories and cases just aren't out there.

Of course, just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you . . . :cool:
 
I think normal guy reasonable starts before that. First, the cop on the street has to have probable cause that a crime was committed and you did it. I've dealt with many shootings where the shooter wasn't arrested at the scene because there was no probable cause to believe he committed a crime. Next, if the cop DOES arrest you on the spot, a prosecutor has to decide whether there is probable cause to believe a crime was committed, whether you did it AND whether they can PROVE it. This has to be done within 48 hours.

After that, if the prosecutor DOES determine all of the above, a judge has to agree with him. Only then is a warrant issued. After that, another judge has to determine whether there is probable cause to believe you committed a crime. That has to be done within two weeks whether you're in custody or not.....

After THAT, ANOTHER judge, now at the circuit court level, has to arraign you again. With all of this review and chances to review and reduce and modify bond, I've never heard of any "reasonable guy" getting a half million cash bond OR being charged and prosecuted BECAUSE he shot someone with a modified gun.

You obviously do not live in Georgia.
 
Link to the story, please, or enough information to search on my own for the incident(s). One will do, but it sounds like you have a list.

I', not talking (in that comment) about incidents. I'm talking about the lack of knowledge of how the system, pre0trial, works in Georgia.

There can be an indictment before a judge, reasonable or otherwise, ever weighs in on the incident.
 
I', not talking (in that comment) about incidents. I'm talking about the lack of knowledge of how the system, pre0trial, works in Georgia.

There can be an indictment before a judge, reasonable or otherwise, ever weighs in on the incident.

That's true in most areas of the country. RSanch11 is talking about what happens when there's no Grand Jury utilized. The Grand Jury system is a prevalent and very valuable resource for law enforcement. I would imagine it's also present in RSanch11's area of the country as well. He just hasn't heard of it.

Still doesn't change my opinion that an indictment along the lines of what you've described is unlikely.
 
There is a world of baloney and speculation out there with respect to self defense trials when the victim used a handgun - or any gun - to defend his life. There are certain rules of thumb that weigh heavily in the favor of we, the people, when it comes to self defense shootings. One interesting rule that you cannot control very well is jurisdiction - do you live in a gun favorable or unfavorable jurisdiction or where were you when the incident occurred? A self defense shooting is easier to not be prosecuted for when the locals and their LEOs and DAs are pro-gun and pro-citizen versus certain other things that they can be "pro" that most of us here dislike. But that's just a circumstance that has nothing to do with a justifiable shooting.

I have said this here before and I'll say it again - it makes NO DIFFERENCE what gun you used, what ammunition, what your gun has done to it, or not, if the shooting was clearly justifiable. Your gun might not even get a cursory laboratory examination if the DA refuses to prosecute from the outset or you get a no true bill from a grand jury. You can use a Desert Eagle, a blunderbuss, a tricked out IPSC race gun, or a 12 pound triggered antique revolver - justified is justified. All the rest is noise.

If, however, there is any reason to cause the DA, the arresting officer, or any of that fraternity to think that maybe the shooting was not so "righteous", well, then you need to be prepared for the more difficult examination of circumstances, motives, and weapons. If you know that your local gendarmerie and prosecutors HATE armed citizens, well, then you need to plan your gun carrying or home defense strategy bearing that in mind.

If people are being arrested and prosecuted for self defense shootings in droves I'd like to hear about it. Good planning is always smart but walking around thinking that your tricked out Kimber 1911 .45 ACP is going to get you into trouble that a standard S&W 642 .38 Special will avoid is just hype generated by people who like to hear themselves talk.

Some of the discussion above is on point - you won't get arrested on the spot if the LEOs are not suspicious with respect to you story and the picture they see of the event. They might take your gun; I can't speak to that, but sleeping in your own bed is likely if you don't act like a jerk and didn't do anything obviously wrong.

As to these items:
1) On a production gun (not a custom gun), leave the trigger pull weight alone.

As a rule I do not tinker with triggers because I dislike light triggers. But there's "light" and there's "a little lighter". I have two defensive guns with triggers that are a modified but not ridiculously light. They shoot way better than they did when I acquired them - and shooting well is the reason to do it. Not to kill people. That's a baloney answer.

If you want a lighter trigger, get a different gun, but don't lighten the trigger below the factory settings. Smoothing the trigger pull and eliminating over travel should be fine, as long as you don't lighten the pull weight.

Says who? Ridiculous. As I said, as a rule I do not do it, but for the guns where I have had it done, no big deal.

2) If using a high-end custom pistol, a 4-pound trigger pull weight is the industry standard, and anything lighter could be argued as unreasonable.

Personally, I think light triggers are unreasonable because they're dangerous. Not because you're not a better shooter, assuming you can handle a light trigger (which i admit that I cannot; I'll just have ADs at the range routinely), but because you might touch off a round unintentionally when the adrenaline hits you. Stopping an attack doesn't always require deadly force - you pull a gun on a perp and he surrenders or truns and runs and then BANG! That's when youre screwed.

3) If you modify your gun it is best to have that modification performed by a competent gunsmith, one who will be willing to go to court and testify why he performed the modification. You had better be personally prepared to logically explain why that modification was done, too.

That makes no sense. I didn't get a third degree from my gunsmith when i paid him to lighten my triggers. I paid him. he did it. What does he care why? He will testify that he did it because I asked him to do it - it makes no difference why. This is hogwash.

4) Never deactivate a safety device on a gun you use for self defense. If you just cannot live with whatever safety device you want to deactivate, then simply change to a different weapon type that does not have that feature.

Okay, I agree with that one. If you can't handle your firearm's safety device get a different gun. But that's pure gun handling logic - you can't drive a stickshift? Drive an automatic transmission. Same logic.

5) Use only factory ammunition for self defense and buy it in sufficient quantity that if exemplars are needed for testing, they are available.

The real reason to use factory ammunition for your self defense tools is because the failure rate of factory ammunition is so low as to be negligible. I don't care how good you are at loading; you cannot match 1 failure in a billion or whatever the statistic is. The only advice I give beyond that to my students is that if you know what the local police use then use the same thing. Nobody can fault you for that kind of good planning.
6) Leave the cute, custom paint jobs, engraving and cartoon logos off your serious self-defense guns. The place for those affectations is at the range, not in the courtroom.

Well, IF you are involved in a self defense shooting, do you really want to hand over a weapon painted with skulls and voodoo symbols that you nicknamed Death Ray? That not only makes you look silly it goes to what we call "mens rea". If the LEOs are suspicious about the event and you hand them the Death Star, painted with Light Sabers and
you'll look ridiculous and if there is reason to doubt the situation that paint job will engender questions you don't need asked so treat your guns like the defensive tools that they were intended to be, respect them, and respect their power, and act accordingly.

But that brings me full circle - if you blew away a perp in your living room armed with a Bowie knife and threatening your family and the gun you used is a camouflage painted AR-style rifle with the words "
DEATH
TO ALL WHO DARKEN MY DOORSTEP
" you'll still look like an idiot but it's unlikely that you'll be prosecuted. But why take that chance?

Yes - lawyer and firearms instructor - in case you were wondering.
 
There is a world of baloney and speculation out there with respect to self defense trials when the victim used a handgun - or any gun - to defend his life. There are certain rules of thumb that weigh heavily in the favor of we, the people, when it comes to self defense shootings. One interesting rule that you cannot control very well is jurisdiction - do you live in a gun favorable or unfavorable jurisdiction or where were you when the incident occurred? A self defense shooting is easier to not be prosecuted for when the locals and their LEOs and DAs are pro-gun and pro-citizen versus certain other things that they can be "pro" that most of us here dislike. But that's just a circumstance that has nothing to do with a justifiable shooting.

I have said this here before and I'll say it again - it makes NO DIFFERENCE what gun you used, what ammunition, what your gun has done to it, or not, if the shooting was clearly justifiable.

As you say, there is a world of differing opinions...the baloney and speculation you point out, your opinion, my opinion, other forum members' opinions...and we can all choose to follow what they choose.

I choose to follow an industry accepted expert who is also qualified in case after case to be considered an "expert witness" and whose expertise I may one day have to rely on...Mas Ayoob.

In his opinion, a light trigger is an invitation to an overzealous prosecutor, and unnecessary to boot. In his opinion a smooth,crisp trigger s important while a light triggerpull is not, unless you are shooting competition.
 
As you say, there is a world of differing opinions...the baloney and speculation you point out, your opinion, my opinion, other forum members' opinions...and we can all choose to follow what they choose.

I choose to follow an industry accepted expert who is also qualified in case after case to be considered an "expert witness" and whose expertise I may one day have to rely on...Mas Ayoob.

In his opinion, a light trigger is an invitation to an overzealous prosecutor, and unnecessary to boot. In his opinion a smooth,crisp trigger s important while a light triggerpull is not, unless you are shooting competition.

Ask Ayoob to give you a case where a light trigger, by itself, invited an overzealous prosecutor . . . I can't find one, but he's the expert.
 
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.
I do not have an actual case, nor a citation....I just want the brick of 22's.:cool:
 
Ask Ayoob to give you a case where a light trigger, by itself, invited an overzealous prosecutor . . . I can't find one, but he's the expert.

I don't have him on speed dial to get a quote on that...:D...but I can give you his opinion on lighter than factory triggers in general as they apply to justifiable self-defense:

Mas Ayoob ~
While more training helps with lighter pulls, it also makes lighter pulls less meaningful to performance, and I don't see training making any difference on this particular issue in court.

Pull weight goes gun by gun, and seems to come down to manufacturer spec, common custom and practice, or both. If Walther puts a 4.5 [pound trigger] into their new striker-fired pistol and calls it good, the user will be more protected than if he put a factory-forbidden 4.5 in his Glock, and the same 4.5 pound pull is well within spec by any standard for the 1911.

To me, that means weight is immaterial. If the weight is out of factory spec its not.
 
Last edited:
I agree that is his opinion . . .

I agree, and we all know about opinions...

On the other hand, if I (God forbid) am ever involved in a self-defense shooting, Ayoob or someone like him, that is an "expert" with creds that have been vetted by many courts, is who will be talking to the DA/judge/jury, depending on how far things go.

If I tell my lawyer that, "The guys on the S&W Forum said..." , I'll be looking for a new lawyer.
 
Last edited:
[COLOR[/COLOR] I advise any and all dont be a Zimmerman call cops and wait around. When the end is clear just get in the Wind and/or go into hiding, re-locate if deemed necessary. If located offer nothing but fear of your life and aware what Zimmerman had to go thru, all influenced your decisions after the shooting. Lastly fear of the State and Fed. Govt, ":and Sharpton if it plays out that way"
 
I agree, and we all know about opinions...

On the other hand, if I (God forbid) am ever involved in a self-defense shooting, Ayoob or someone like him, that is an "expert" with creds that have been vetted by many courts, is who will be talking to the DA/judge/jury, depending on how far things go.

If I tell my lawyer that, "The guys on the S&W Forum said..." , I'll be looking for a new lawyer.

I'm not here to bash Ayoob, and if that's who you think will save your life, live long and prosper. I've reviewed his CV. I'll pick someone else.
 
I agree, and we all know about opinions...

On the other hand, if I (God forbid) am ever involved in a self-defense shooting, Ayoob or someone like him, that is an "expert" with creds that have been vetted by many courts, is who will be talking to the DA/judge/jury, depending on how far things go.

If I tell my lawyer that, "The guys on the S&W Forum said..." , I'll be looking for a new lawyer.

If this happens and Ayoob or one of his disciples decide to finally reveal that top secret case they have been hiding all this time please let him know there will be a brick of 22lr waiting for him.
 
I agree, and we all know about opinions...

On the other hand, if I (God forbid) am ever involved in a self-defense shooting, Ayoob or someone like him, that is an "expert" with creds that have been vetted by many courts, is who will be talking to the DA/judge/jury, depending on how far things go.

If I tell my lawyer that, "The guys on the S&W Forum said..." , I'll be looking for a new lawyer.

If you tell your lawyer that, "Ayoob said . . . " and show him this, you may also be looking for a new lawyer.

Shawn Dodson on Massad Ayoob . . . 2006

Not bashing anyone, just pointing you to the opinion of others. Blind affinity is dangerous. Make sure you know what you're getting.
 
Last edited:
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."

It was Ms. Du's contention at trial that she did not intend to shoot the shoplifter in the back of the head, did not remember shooting her and had never fired a gun before. If that's an intentional shooting, I'm Raquel Welch. The court's whole point ("hairpin trigger" and all) was that had the trigger not been modified the unintentional discharge would likely not have occurred.

It's a fine argument against keeping a gun you don't know how to use and getting into a knock-down, drag-out with someone a third your age over a bottle of orange juice.

Still waiting for a case that addresses the question of modifications in intentional shootings.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top