OldMarksman
Staff
That you are may not be aware of some fact or other does not make it "just an opinion".That's OK, I'll wait for the court case to be cited. Other than that, it's just opinion.
Nothing silly about it. There has been an injury. Proving that it was more likely unintentional the not can result in much greater compensation for damages. A modified trigger opens the door, and then other experts provide objective evidence about the physiological effects of stress on fine motor skills. And about how people who swear up and down that they keep their fingers off triggers don't always really do so.Granted, I will agree that sometimes attorneys, like all normal people, can and do say silly things.
Dispensed with in your mind, maybe, but "deep pocket" police departments have mitigated the risk by specifying long heavy triggers.In the end though, it was just noise that is quickly dispensed with.
This subject is covered at length in MAG-20 Classroom, Armed Citizen's Rules of Engagement. There is a lot to be covered in 20 hours, and if this were not an important issue, it would never have made the list of subjects.
Several major cities had so many claims against them, most of which were settled out of court, in the days of DA revolvers that they modified the guns so act they could not be fired single action. There is no difference between the concept of an unintentional discharge with a cocked revolver and one with a semiauto with a hair trigger. Both resulted in new weapon specifications, the latter being the reason for the Glock New York Trigger.
That has nothing to do about philosophies in NYC--it is the amount of treasure in the "deep pockets". Other cities have done the same thing.
That risk is a major reason for not lightening the pull weight of the trigger on firearm carried for defense, and it is a very good reason for selecting a revolver that cannot be fired single action. My SP-101 has been so modified. The Centennial and the new Kimber K-6 are designed that way.
Cases? Well to cite a few, there are Florida v. Louis Alvarez, NY v. Magliano, Santibanes v. Tomball TX.
The specifics of those are completely irrelevant. One thing I have learned over the years is that anyone who attempts to argue a position by saying "show me a case..." knows next to nothing about the litigation process or risk management.
Speaking of risk management--legal liability is but one issue here. There is also the little matter of safety.