Light Trigger Pull Liability

[TacticalReload]

If I understand your post correctly - the issue of trigger pull was raised during some of the cases, but was deemed not to be relevant. I'm interested in learning how the issue of relevancy to the outcome was determined?

I wish I could agree with your assessment of how the court system operates. Perhaps in the ideal world it does, but not in real life.

Being new to the forum I was unaware that this topic had been extensively discussed. My purpose in posting was not to dissuade anyone from modifying their trigger - rather to highlight a potential issue that I read on another posting on a sub-forum(that was felt important enough to be made a sticky), that they should consider when making their decision.

I would suggest you thoroughly read the linked thread below.

The last time this issue came up on this forum, those cases were discussed in detail, including input from Ayoob. The conclusion was the cases hinged on other issues, ie. not self defense, etc. Trigger pull was not the elephant in the room as you may believe. I encourage you to read the last discussion in its entirety for a better understanding of those cases.

As a lawyer with access to nationwide court records, I have searched for years and never found an actual civilian self defense case (criminal or civil) where the civilian maintained a self defense theory and trigger pull became a relevant issue.

Some will create scenarios in their own imagination where they believe this would be relevant, but the court system actually operates on facts and the law. There is objective reasoning why none of those wild hypotheticals have come to actual fruition.

http://smith-wessonforum.com/smith-...8-trigger-pull-modification-legal-issues.html

Thank you for this post.

I've noticed quite a few things whenever this topic gets brought up. First thing is the tangential relationship between parts of what happens in one or two cases and the extrapolated "therefore it must be true that..." that inevitably follows. Cocking the hammer =/= modifying the trigger pull. Civilian self defense =/= LEO firearms use. Apex duty & carry kit =/= removing the grip safety, thumb safety, and setting trigger pull to 9 oz. on a 1911. Negligent discharge =/= lawful, intentional deadly force.

I'm not going to begrudge Ayoob. He might be a better shooter than I am, he might be more knowledgeable than I am, and he certainly has more experienced in a courtroom than I have. I definitely respect his ability to have turned firearms into an entire way to make a living without having gone through the "traditional means" (law school or spec ops experience or extensive FT law enforcement experience or whatever). I have thoughts about his writings and opinions that are not relevant here so there is no reason to bring them up -- good or bad. (I will note, though, that he is the only gun magazine writer who I can recognize easily just a couple of paragraphs into an article without previously seeing who the author was.) One thing that I can say, however, is that I feel like so much of this particular argument just reeks of the tail wagging the dog so hard that it should be obvious what's happening.

I've learned over the years that the real facts in court cases aren't nearly as cut-and-dried as presented by the media (or by anyone with an agenda). Just because our choice in graduate studies wasn't law, while making us less learned, doesn't make us any less able to do the research and understand the outcomes. When we see "§" or something v. something following a statement, it doesn't mean we need to take it for granted. Read the case if you care enough to verify the facts. When people just take what is spoon-fed to them, you get what happened in the Zimmerman case... and the real case gets buried under so much noise.

We, as the collective "gun people", have passed down so-called wisdom to each other for so long that there are certain things that just elicit a knee-jerk response on forums. Heaven forbid someone call it a clip or *gasp* use their thumb to release the slide or not show a gun is clear at the beginning of a youtube video or... modify a carry gun in any way (well... except changing sights or swapping grip panels or using an extended mag release or adding grip plugs or changing guide rods or adding stippling or adding grip tape or adding slip on grips or removing warning labels or using aftermarket magazines or swapping to an aftermarket barrel or adding basepads or undercutting the trigger guard or swapping the extractor or removing loaded chamber indicator flags or adding beavertails or removing beavertails or pretty much damn near anything and everything except touching the trigger mechanism, which apparently is the only no-no).

There is a famous experiment with five monkeys, a banana, a ladder, and a water hose. While the experiment is almost definitely fabricated, there is certainly a lesson to be learned there.

 

[EdJG]

I would suggest you thoroughly read the linked thread below.

There is a famous experiment with five monkeys, a banana, a ladder, and a water hose. While the experiment is almost definitely fabricated, there is certainly a lesson to be learned there.

I did.

I guess your "famous experiment" may not be as well known as you think it is - your meaning is lost on me.

Candidly, the tone of these posts has become more argumentative than useful. Perhaps you should re-read my posts to see where I'm coming from

 

[Rastoff]

Every single time you shoot your gun, you are lightening the trigger, are you not?

Well, maybe. Physics tells us that if a fly lands on an aircraft carrier, that ship will float proportionally lower in the water. Does anyone really care?

Yes, every time two metal surfaces rub against each other they remove material. However, that amount is so slight as to be insignificant to the point of being immeasurable. For example, I have a trigger pull weight gauge. I measured my 1911 trigger pull when I got it. More than 8K live rounds and at least 100,000 dry presses later, it measures the same while using the same gauge. Did it get lighter over all that time? Sure, just not enough to measure.

Show me an actual case where someone was convicted solely based on using a weapon in self defense that had a modified trigger pull.

The posting by Massad Ayoob cites two cases. See OP for link.

Normally I agree with Mr. Ayoob, but in this case his logic doesn't fit the discussion.

In both of those cases the person shot was someone who should not have been shot regardless of trigger pull weight. The modified triggers may have been a factor in the negligent discharge, but weren't the main reason the one fellow went to prison. He went to prison because he shot someone when he shouldn't have.

I reiterate, in a righteous shoot, the trigger pull weight will be irrelevant. Further, if the shooting wasn't justified, why was the gun pointed in his direction in the first place?

This will sound contradictory, but it's not. Too light a pull weight can be a problem. It can cause a second discharge when one wasn't intended. That's an issue. For me, 4lbs is the absolute minimum. If my carry gun dropped below that, I'm having it fixed. That's just me. Everyone needs to set their own threshold.

Further, everyone should invest in a pull weight gauge. Why? Because a trigger pull weight that changes dramatically can indicate other issues.

 

[Muss Muggins]

A couple things before this discourse gets closed . . .

A pistol's trigger pull will probably come up during a wrongful death suit, but it won't be the defining factor.

Courts actually do function on admissible facts. The public's view of how the criminal and civil legal world operates is so skewed from what the media chooses to share that it is near impossible to correct the record. Believe what you want, but those that have spent their careers dealing with it picture wearing a tinfoil hat while you type.

No matter what the law "says," the only way that we know whether or not a particular set of facts is legal or not is to test it through the court system.

 

[Rastoff]

I guess your "famous experiment" may not be as well known as you think it is - your meaning is lost on me.

They took 5 monkeys and put them in a room with a ladder. Now and then they would suspend a banana above the ladder. Any time a monkey would attempt to ascend the ladder, the other monkeys would be blasted with a water hose.

It wasn't long before the monkeys would attack any individual monkey that tried to climb the ladder. They didn't want to be sprayed.

Then they took one monkey away and put in a new one. When the new one tried to climb the ladder, the other monkeys would attack him. He had never been sprayed and didn't understand why he was being attacked, but this was how it was.

Another original was taken away and substituted with a new one. Of course, as soon as he tried to climb the ladder, he was brutally attacked.

Eventually, all the original monkeys were replaced with new ones. If any new one tried to climb the ladder, the others would attack him. Even though none of the monkeys left had ever been sprayed, they continued to attack any monkey that tried to climb the ladder.

It is the great social experiment. We continue to do what the group does even though we don't know why.

 

[TacticalReload]

I did.

I guess your "famous experiment" may not be as well known as you think it is - your meaning is lost on me.

Candidly, the tone of these posts has become more argumentative than useful. Perhaps you should re-read my posts to see where I'm coming from

I apologize for assuming that most people have heard about the "experiment" as I've heard it numerous times from different sources. It's a very commonly cited story when group-think in business is talked about, but it probably is not really talked about outside of that context so I can see where I was wrong in my assumption.

I also apologize if you think I'm bringing a less-than-useful and argumentative tone to the thread. (I'm not quite sure what you're looking for.) I wasn't trying to be pedantic, and I don't think opposing viewpoints can be made without some back-and-forth. I think healthy debate is the foundation of any decent forum conversation, and this one hasn't degraded to the point where anyone is name-calling or being rude.

As for my pointing you to that thread, I wasn't being rude... it was a genuine suggestion because I thought that the body of that thread was pretty decent at explaining the part that the trigger pull played in the case.

 

[Muss Muggins]

I always wondered why the monkeys didn't scramble to climb the ladder, since they didn't get sprayed if they were on the ladder.

My last psyche professor told me to shut up . . .

They took 5 monkeys and put them in a room with a ladder. Now and then they would suspend a banana above the ladder. Any time a monkey would attempt to ascend the ladder, the other monkeys would be blasted with a water hose.

It wasn't long before the monkeys would attack any individual monkey that tried to climb the ladder. They didn't want to be sprayed.

Then they took one monkey away and put in a new one. When the new one tried to climb the ladder, the other monkeys would attack him. He had never been sprayed and didn't understand why he was being attacked, but this was how it was.

Another original was taken away and substituted with a new one. Of course, as soon as he tried to climb the ladder, he was brutally attacked.

Eventually, all the original monkeys were replaced with new ones. If any new one tried to climb the ladder, the others would attack him. Even though none of the monkeys left had ever been sprayed, they continued to attack any monkey that tried to climb the ladder.

It is the great social experiment. We continue to do what the group does even though we don't know why.

 

[shouldazagged]

Heavy trigger pulls are the real liability.

I beg your pardon? I seem to have missed something there, unless you're referring to about a thirty-pound pull weight.

I'm okay with the original post, but this deceased horse must be pretty well pulverized by now.

I carry a concealed-hammer DAO revolver with about a ten-pound trigger. I do that not because of the "light trigger liability" concern so much as for the comfort I take in not being able to elect single-action fire and thus increase the risk of accidental discharge with adrenaline coming out my ears. If I fire the gun I want it to be by very conscious decision.

Do what you like with your guns. The odds against your having to use them to defend yourselves are very high. I'll take the route that makes me comfortable and has for a long time.

 

[TacticalReload]

I'm okay with the original post, but this deceased horse must be pretty well pulverized by now.

If every single repetitive thread were instantly eliminated web-wide, 95% of every forum would magically disappear.

 

[Smoke]

Candidly, the tone of these posts has become more argumentative than useful

You took a thread that the moderators saw fit to lock( one with almost 62 thousand hits BTW so it's not like we needed your help to find it) and tried to resurrect it.

What did you think was going to happen?

 

[Muss Muggins]

You took a thread that the moderators saw fit to lock( one with almost 62 thousand hits BTW so it's not like we needed your help to find it) and tried to resurrect it.

What did you think was going to happen?

Well, in all fairness, the linked thread is a sticky at the top of the Concealed Carry forum, is entitled "Exclusive for Lee" and was apparently locked immediately after it was created. It doesn't appear that comment on that thread was ever intended to be allowed.

 

[EdJG]

I apologize for assuming that most people have heard about the "experiment" as I've heard it numerous times from different sources. It's a very commonly cited story when group-think in business is talked about, but it probably is not really talked about outside of that context so I can see where I was wrong in my assumption.

I also apologize if you think I'm bringing a less-than-useful and argumentative tone to the thread. (I'm not quite sure what you're looking for.) I wasn't trying to be pedantic, and I don't think opposing viewpoints can be made without some back-and-forth. I think healthy debate is the foundation of any decent forum conversation, and this one hasn't degraded to the point where anyone is name-calling or being rude.

As for my pointing you to that thread, I wasn't being rude... it was a genuine suggestion because I thought that the body of that thread was pretty decent at explaining the part that the trigger pull played in the case.

No problem - no offense taken, and I trust none given.

I agree with you, Southcoast's and others comments about the risk of modifying your trigger being exaggerated; and even more important - the Internet's ability to create its own "truths".

 

[Rastoff]

I always wondered why the monkeys didn't scramble to climb the ladder, since they didn't get sprayed if they were on the ladder.

If the experiment were really conducted, I'm sure that once a monkey started up the ladder, the others were getting sprayed even if they started for the ladder.

My last psyche professor told me to shut up . . .

I'm not surprised, but that is a very poor answer from a professor.

 

[Muss Muggins]

I'm not surprised, but that is a very poor answer from a professor.

That's why I wasn't a psyche major. That guy was better than the one who chained smoked while squatting on a tall stool and the one who gave extra points based on your answers to the quiz on the previous evening's late night showing of Dobie Gillis . . .

 

[McE]

A heavy trigger pull is only a preventative if your finger is on the trigger.
Your finger is on the trigger if you mean to shoot.
Everyone is more accurate with a lighter trigger, all else being equal.

So, with proper trigger discipline, trigger weight is irrelevant to safety. The only difference presented is accuracy. Being more accurate is safer.

 

[armorer951]

http://smith-wessonforum.com/concea...facts-about-light-trigger-pull-liability.html

 

[Fastbolt]

Folks who typically like to argue that lighter-than-factory trigger pulls aren't remotely potentially detrimental to their adventures within the criminal or civil court system ... are certainly free to risk having to pay more money to attorneys to deal with it, if it arises for a couple of different possible reasons.

Predictable is preventable.

If the major gun companies and LE/Gov agencies often feel that it's a relatively important consideration, and they've dealt with it within the context of trigger pull weight being a commonly required specification, then perhaps it might bear some consideration by the motoring public when it comes to handguns carried as dedicated defensive weapons.

Sporting, recreational and gaming guns are usually another matter.

One of the great things about being able to exercise individual choice, is being able to have the privilege to bear the potential consequences of individual decisions.

 

[hexnut]

Could you post a few times when these potential consequences came to bare in a court case. Just wondering. As out lawyer friend on this forum has never been able to find any.

"The last time this issue came up on this forum, those cases were discussed in detail, including input from Ayoob. The conclusion was the cases hinged on other issues, ie. not self defense, etc. Trigger pull was not the elephant in the room as you may believe. I encourage you to read the last discussion in its entirety for a better understanding of those cases.

As a lawyer with access to nationwide court records, I have searched for years and never found an actual civilian self defense case (criminal or civil) where the civilian maintained a self defense theory and trigger pull became a relevant issue.

Some will create scenarios in their own imagination where they believe this would be relevant, but the court system actually operates on facts and the law. There is objective reasoning why none of those wild hypotheticals have come to actual fruition."

 

[McE]

Folks who typically like to argue that lighter-than-factory trigger pulls aren't remotely potentially detrimental to their adventures within the criminal or civil court system ... are certainly free to risk having to pay more money to attorneys to deal with it, if it arises for a couple of different possible reasons.

Predictable is preventable.

If the major gun companies and LE/Gov agencies often feel that it's a relatively important consideration, and they've dealt with it within the context of trigger pull weight being a commonly required specification, then perhaps it might bear some consideration by the motoring public when it comes to handguns carried as dedicated defensive weapons.

Sporting, recreational and gaming guns are usually another matter.

One of the great things about being able to exercise individual choice, is being able to have the privilege to bear the potential consequences of individual decisions.

Some might think it prudent to live by "better safe than sorry", but that attitude shares a bed with fear mongering.
Living by fear or idioms is a lazy way to go about one's days.

 

[TacticalReload]

http://smith-wessonforum.com/concea...facts-about-light-trigger-pull-liability.html

Someone has been posting without reading the thread first.

Folks who typically like to argue that lighter-than-factory trigger pulls aren't remotely potentially detrimental to their adventures within the criminal or civil court system ... are certainly free to risk having to pay more money to attorneys to deal with it, if it arises for a couple of different possible reasons.

Predictable is preventable.

If the major gun companies and LE/Gov agencies often feel that it's a relatively important consideration, and they've dealt with it within the context of trigger pull weight being a commonly required specification, then perhaps it might bear some consideration by the motoring public when it comes to handguns carried as dedicated defensive weapons.

Sporting, recreational and gaming guns are usually another matter.

One of the great things about being able to exercise individual choice, is being able to have the privilege to bear the potential consequences of individual decisions.

In general, heavier pulls straight from the factory are there to prevent negligent discharges and to ensure greater reliability with a wider variety of ammo (due to the accompanying heavier springs). They aren't there so, when you're in court after a SD shooting, you can protect yourself from some sort over-zealous prosecutor. If you have a negligent discharge with your modified, ultra-light trigger or a gun that you removed safety-features from, I can see someone saying you are culpable for whatever happens... but that's not what we are talking about here. However, I agree with you... you make your choices, you deal with what shakes down afterward.