Light Triggers and Lawyers???

Status
Not open for further replies.
Obvious intentions via words or graphics

I agree with the post stating that firearms adornments such as skulls on grips do not help the defense in a shooting case. Also of no help are user names in various firearms forums, including TFL, that allude to non-hunting killing or other violent actions. Tough to defend someone whose user name, hypothetically speaking, is "Kill 'em all."
 
The trigger issue is only going to come up IF you get charged for the shooting. At that point, everything is on the table. Don't hire Harold Fish's attorney.
 
This topic comes up a lot.

My take on it is this:

If you really want to modify (as in lighten, vs smooth) your trigger pull, then -
a) be prepared to explain how it helps you hit the target, and not miss the target and hit an innocent bystander;

b) be prepared to show that your modification does not fall beyond the pale of what most serious shooters would do to a carry weapon;

c) be prepared to show your own training and qualifications (course certificates, military training, etc) to show that you made an informed decision based on merits, not based on trying to emulate some internet tough guy;

d) be prepared to hire an expert defense witness, who can testify as to the condition of and modifications to your weapon, if necessary.

If you can't intelligently explain why you did it, in such a way that it will make sense to a jury; or, if the judge won't let you testify about it, because your own expertise prior to the event cannot be established; then that defense expert could be crucial.

Edit: To clarify, I don't recommend going less than 4lbs for single action; I don't have any carry guns set up with less than 4lb triggers; the advice listed above was for those cases where people insist on doing so.
 
Last edited:
DT Guy said:
...Will having your life threatened somehow make you a BETTER shot, able to shoot precisely with a trigger you can't normally shoot that well with?...
Click to expand...
On the other hand, if you can't shoot well with a good service grade trigger (say 4 to 5 pounds on a 1911, the stock 5.5 +/- trigger on a Glock, or a reasonably smooth 10 to 12 DA trigger), you need more training and practice.

DT Guy said:
...One need only ask an 'expert' witness if he would prefer to hit a small difficult target with a three pound trigger or a nine pound trigger to demonstrate the principle.
Click to expand...
Alaska444 said:
...From the literature I have read, the experts will not be on your side...
Click to expand...
I have access to the services of an expert who is a police instructor and armorer. He will state that a 4 to 5 pound trigger is appropriate for a service 1911 and that he will not set a 1911 trigger lighter than 4 pounds. If I used one of my 1911s with a 4.5 pound trigger, he will be testifying for me. If someone used a 1911 with a 3 pound trigger, he will be testifying for the DA.
 
I'm just going to repeat what I've said. It's not about what we think. This issue is entirely about what the people who will charge, try, and convict you will think, if your actions draw legal attention to yourself.

One of the simplest things you can do to protect yourself is to use an unaltered firearm, and "normal" SD ammo.

The second is to not make a target of yourself and your character.

You can get every desirable combat modification in a stock pistol, just buy an off the shelf combat weapon. (off the shelf means NO MODIFICATIONS done by you.)

Stock, standard, ordinary SD ammo is not going to draw attention, but "black talons" will hurt you. Why would anyone (not LE) carry something like that in the legal environment today? ("ladies and gentlemen of the jury, this sick, twisted psycho had FIFTEEN ROUNDS OF BLACK TALON AMMUNITION IN HIS PISTOL!" when he carried his pistol into that liquor store at midnight he had no intent of leaving any survivors!")


It's simple. If you ignore these facts, and trust in your fellow man to see past it all, you will be the one in jail and bankrupt with legal fees, while the guy who carried a stock S&W .38 police revolver may be at home with his wife after similar incidents.
 
briandg, as far as ammo goes, find out what your local, county, and state LE use; it will virtually always be some sort of modern hollow-point. Use that or something similar, and the ammo argument is easily won by a competent lawyer.
 
That is exactly right.

Our LE uses anything available. They most recently to my knowledge used hydra shock. They've used silvertip, nyclad, and other mass market SD rounds.

Personally, I have standard 115 grain silver tips in 9 mm, and golden saber 125 +p in my .38s and .357s. Nothing out of the ordinary.

I keep my .357 carbine loaded with .38 special in ordinary handloads; underloading the high powered magnum should offset the handload worry, I believe.

The logic between both of the factory loads is that the FBI once used the silvertip, and also used the 125 grain +p. Golden saber are a very conservative round, as opposed to a specialty SD round.
 
For the record, I'm court-certifiable as an expert witness in the use of force, so I'm not exactly without any experience-and it wasn't experience gained on the internet.

A light trigger is ONLY an issue if the prosecution contends the shooting wasn't intentional-which they well may-and it will be up to you and your attorney(s) to prove the shoot was completely intentional. (And yes, attorney's are expensive, but it would be silly to think a 9 pound trigger would mean one WOULD'NT need a lawyer...) Once you prove the shooting was intentional, trigger pull weight is a non-issue.

If someone is confident that they will shoot well enough with a 5, 6, or 14 pound trigger to solve any defensive situation, they should carry that type of trigger. I have 30+ years of experience with 'light' SA triggers used in LEO and competition environments, and can articulate very explicitly how every modification done to my firearm makes me less likely to hit an innocent and more likely to have to shoot LESS to end a threat.

For everyone who considers that every defensive shooting situation will be across the hood of their car, I suggest this. I prefer to shoot a gun that will allow me to shoot to my potential, as surviving the encounter is the first step in winning the fight-dead men never make it to court.

And "Mas Ayoob"...enough said.

Larry
 
I agree with this completely as it may pertain to a criminal defense. But in civil court, the plaintiffs attorneys will make hay with a modified trigger, especially if it is lighter than what a typical LE agency would approve.

But I share the opinion that the best way to avoid liability is not to make any horrible mistakes in the first place, and for me, that means a carry trigger in the 4-5 lb. neighborhood. I find I can place shots with more precision with such a trigger. That makes it safer for innocent bystanders in my opinion.

Sub 3.5 lb. triggers for a defensive pistol may be regarded as irresponsible in court, especially civil court.
 
briandg said:
. . . .I keep my .357 carbine loaded with .38 special in ordinary handloads; underloading the high powered magnum should offset the handload worry, I believe. . . .
Click to expand...
briandg, the "handload worry" is not about underloading or overloading. It's about evidentiary issues. Daniel Bias loaded light loads for his wife, and that didn't really work out that well for him.

Edited to add: Also, for more information on the issue of reloads for SD, I put together a collection of threads on that a while back. If you're interested in seeing those arguments, just run a search for threads I've created.
 
Last edited:
DTGuy, or Larry, if you prefer...

Mas Ayoob, when online, is identifiable. So is Marty Hayes.

If you consider yourself to be an expert on the same plane, or possibly on a higher plane where you can seem to talk down to/about Mas, why don't you tell us who you are?

Then we could look up some of your court experiences and achievements, so we could make a more informed decision when comparing your opinions with Mas's, or Marty's.

So far, you are telling us, relatively anonymously, that you know better. So show us why we should take your word.
 
DT Guy said:
For the record, I'm court-certifiable as an expert witness in the use of force,...
Click to expand...
Well if you're on trial, you can hardly be your own expert witness. Certainly your credibility as an expert will be minimal, if that.

Perhaps you've lined up an expert witness who will see things your way. But of course the DA will have his experts as well.
 
It appears that true firearms experts advice on this issue just doesn't budge some folks. It was enough for me, but if you want to look further, go to the actual cases involving this issue and the appeals court decisions that affirm the expert recommendations. People are simply over looking that this issue is a settled matter of law already. No matter how many times you say something isn't so, the evidence speaks otherwise when you look at actual court case documentation.

PEOPLE STATE NEW YORK v. FRANK MAGLIATO (07/08/86)

COURT OF APPEALS OF NEW YORK

. . . At trial, defendant did not dispute that he drew his weapon and cocked it. However, he contended that his pistol had a hair trigger and that he accidentally exerted enough pressure to fire it. The defense adduced expert testimony describing the operation of a colt .38 pistol such as defendant's. In "single action" position, the shooter manually cocks the hammer, as defendant did here. Only 4 1/2 pounds of pressure are required to move the trigger the remaining .012 to .015 inch. A second defense expert characterized defendant's pistol as having a "hair trigger" in such "single action" position, explaining that the "slightest movement", "extremely light" pressure would cause the weapon to discharge.

. . . The mere display or brandishing of a pistol may, perhaps, create an insufficiently imminent threat to life to be considered the "use" of deadly physical force. But, leveling a loaded pistol, with the cocked hammer set to release under the slightest pressure, and pointing it at another approaching from across the street is conduct well beyond a warning or preparation for a deadly act. Such conduct, itself, constitutes a deadly act regardless of how or why the final bit of pressure is applied. Indeed, it creates a danger so nearly approximating the discharge of a pistol as to be reasonably deemed its equivalent for the purpose of the law of justification.
Click to expand...

http://ny.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.19860708_0048721.NY.htm/qx

Everyone is allowed their own opinions on these issues and to act in due manner according to that opinion, however, the courts will have the final say and the above case is settled law and not likely to change anytime soon. Not only trigger jobs, but simply placing in SA is deemed reckless endangerment since the "slightest movement" can cause an accidental discharge.

There is a reason that DAO is the most defensible CCW to carry. Not that a good lawyer with a LOOOOOOOTTTTT of major bucks might get you off with a trigger job on your gun, but why go there. Just doesn't seem worth the risk in my opinion, but that in the end is all I have, my opinion. It does seem however, certain people's opinions matter more than others. When all is said and done, the judge and jury's opinion will matter a bunch more than yours. God forbid any of us ever have the need to put these issues to a test in real life.
 
Last edited:
Alaska444, while I agree with the general point you are making, I think you are reading that case too broadly. The case you cite took place in New York in 1983. The defendant was approached by a man with a club who had rear ended his vehicle. The defendant fired a single shot, striking the man between the eyes. Under New York law, the defendant had a duty to retreat, if he could do so safely, and the facts in the case strongly suggested he could. The defendant argued that because his shot was unintentional, he was not using deadly force by pointing the gun at his attacker and asked for a modified jury instruction - basically he wanted to argue he was justified in displaying the gun but he didn't want to argue self-defense because the state would come back with "duty to retreat.". The judge said if he made that argument, it would have to rely on justification of self-defense. The defendant appealed this decision.

The testimony that a 4.5lb trigger was a hair trigger came from the defense witness. Rather than accept this argument the Court of Appeals ruled that based on the defense's own testimony, cocking and pointing a single action pistol at someone was dangerous enough to qualify as use of deadly force and therefore had to meet all the requirements under statute.

I think your characterization that simply placing a firearm in SA is reckless endangerment in NY is probably reaching further than the case above would allow.

I'd also add that I've looked at a lot of cases involving hair-triggers and this is the first one I've seen where 4.5lbs was claimed as a hair trigger. The whole "I didn't mean to shoot him, it was an accident" defense is common enough that you can usually find lots of cases where the state's firearms expert has testified as to what he considers a hair trigger. Until today, the highest I'd seen was 3.5lbs... and I think the difference here is probably that it was a defense expert trying to support the defense's claim that it WAS unintentional.

The problem we are usually looking at in self-defense goes the other way, the defense would be trying to prove that a shot was fired intentionally while the prosecutor/plaintiff's lawyer is trying to prove it was an accident.

Disturbing case though, that guy would probably be a free man if it had happened in a state with an NRA-style "Stand Your Ground" law.
 
Last edited:
The article I linked contains my full name, but my CV is not (and will not be) online.

I don't have any wish to change anyone's opinion about how they should approach self-defense shooting; I offered my opinion, and have no vested interest in proselytizing regarding it.

AFA the comment re: Mr. Ayoob, I should have refrained; my opinion of him was formed largely in the LEO, rather than the on-line forum, community, where he is viewed somewhat differently.

Larry
 
It seems a lot of people have never had to face a hostile attorney before. Based on the assumption that you are charged with the shooting (Whether you think it was justified or not) a whole new can of worms will be opened.

The prosecutor is going to start with what were you wearing that morning and work his/her way up to anything that might even remotely show that you were "On the Hunt" when you got out of bed. The prosecutor is going to try to paint you as someone who was looking for trouble and show how you prepared for it.

Most juries are given so much crap to fish through in order to find the truth, any extra crap they can be given will only help the prosecution. The less crap you can help provide, the better.
 
With reference to Alaska444's case citation, I think if I had an expert who describes a 4-1/2-pound trigger pull as a "hair trigger" ... I'd pay his consulting fee to prevent the opposition from using him, but I would NOT put him on the stand. 4-1/2 pounds is what most 1911 cognoscenti regard as a safe trigger for self-defense carry. It is not a "hair trigger."

However, I understand that the goal here was to try to claim an accidental discharge, so perhaps the expert would have testified that a 6-pound trigger was a "hair trigger" based solely on the length of pull required.
 
April 18, 2008, 05:54 PM #33
Mas Ayoob
Senior Member

Join Date: December 1, 2005
Posts: 236

Convictions are few; charges and lawsuits have been many. We're winning the "hair trigger" cases, by and large, but at the cost of agonizing, expensive, drawn out trials. Anyone who has been through it will tell you it's an ordeal to be avoided, and anyone with common sense can see that before they go through it.
Click to expand...

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2815735&postcount=33
 
Pharmacist

"Even when not necessary to stop the threat? You do realize, don't you, that a pharmacist was recently found guilty of murder for shooting someone multiple times when it (apparantly) wasn't necessary?"

Don H.: You may recall that the pharmacist was not convicted because he shot robbers because he was in fear for his life, but he was convicted because he chased one of them out of the store and shot the one already lying on the floor when he returned, as I recall.
 
pilazinool,

Let's not stray off topic. And you've essentially quoted Don H out of context.

Everyone is invited to see what Don H wrote in context in post 6.

Anyway, this is an old thread, and I'm going to close it now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top