Modified triggers and self defense

Status
Not open for further replies.
This is another reason that you should never cock a DA handgun when facing possible hostilities. As was mentioned, stress and nerves could cause you to AD. Let the guy yell "boo" and with a cocked handgun, you may put a bullet in his head.

This wil go in a police report. The lawyers will be aware that you could have left it in DA mode, and that you chose the situation that resulted in the AD. Not a good situation.

The worst thing about potentially being in a shooting situation is the financial risk, IMO. Legal fees would be enormous.
 
temmi said:
I think so long as it is a legal shoot you are fine. If it's a bad/questionable shoot or unintentional then I think you will have a worse time than if you had a stock pistol.
Click to expand...
Yep
Click to expand...
Nope.

[1] You're not the one who will decide if it's legal.

[2] Every intentional act of violence against another human is questionable unless/until the DA or the grand jury or, if you're unlucky enough to have it go that far, your trial jury decides it was legally justified.
 
Ayoob; legal defenses, jury trials...

It's a bit off the basic topic but Massad Ayoob also said in the past that even a decent, law abiding citizen that's 100% innocent who faces a criminal court case has about 10% chance of being found: GUILTY by a court/jury in the US.

A jury or grand jury doesn't clear you or state that you are "innocent" just not guilty of the charges.
To carry a firearm or own a weapon for defense means understanding fully the legal & social ramifications related to it.
That's why skill training, knowing the local laws/ordnances and acting in a mature, responsible way is so important.

ClydeFrog
 
Does anyone have a link to any self defense incident where the "good guy" was convicted solely for modifying the trigger on his handgun?


Unless someone can show me a real life incident I'll just chalk it up as internet mythical nonsense.
 
peacefulgary said:
Does anyone have a link to any self defense incident where the "good guy" was convicted solely for modifying the trigger on his handgun?...
Click to expand...
No one is ever convicted solely for anything. It's always a combination of things, often like a jigsaw puzzle is constructed from many small pieces.

And if it's come up, we wouldn't know how much of a factor it was to the jurors unless some post verdict juror interviews are made public. That rarely happens.
 
here's a twist. Have you ever heard of someone being cleared pretty summarily in a SD shooting because he was shooting at an ill behaved dirtbag? It happens frequently, but it also goes awry an awful lot.

You will not find a jury judgement due solely to a modified trigger. Add skulls on ivory grips, a collection of black rifles in the basement, gangster or antisocial tattoos, or other sociocultural clues that the shooter is a violent or antisocial person, and he will stand a much greater chance of trial and conviction.

People look at a package. Police report it to the prosecutor, and the prosecutor presents it to your peers in the jury. a modified trigger or dangerous use of a weapon may be reported to the jury, with an explanation of why it proves that the shooter was a dangerous, careless gun owner.

A neonazi thug who shoots a guy in front of a bar because he (maybe) flashed a knife in a threatening manner will maybe be charged and convicted. You, in your home, stand a pretty small chance of being tried and convicted because you shot someone in a clear case of self defense.

The small details are what will convince the legal system that you acted improperly.
 
Ayoob, court cases, handguns....

Not to keep bringing up Massad Ayoob but he has written at length about armed citizens who faced legal issues due to factors related to the firearms involved.

I recall of few of his articles bringing up different points. Here are a few(this is also based on my memory NOT a detailed, researched account of Ayoob's work);

A lawyer who had an AD with a handgun in his office & shot his office assistant faced a civil suit. The lawyers made an issue of him removing a magazine safety from a Hi-Power pistol(not the firearm used but in his own collection). Ayoob testified in that court case.
In the early 1980s, a Miami police officer shot a teen in a dispute. He later faced criminal charges by the state atty for Dade County. The prosecutors claimed the police officer "cocked" the hammer on his double action revolver.
They also stated the police officer "lightened" the revolver's trigger pull which caused a "hair trigger".
Ayoob has other gun press items about how the # of rounds in a semi auto pistol, the model's name(Predator, Terminator, etc), custom grips and handgun ammunition have all been used in legal cases-criminal court actions.

As posted, a number of factors will be involved in a use of force criminal investigation. It doesn't seem fair but that's what happens.
ClydeFrog
 
Ayoob is one of the true experts in this field.

removing The magazine safety on a hi power is a common thing. An atty jumped on the presence of A pistol in the private collection that had one of several mechanisms disabled, not even the one used in the shooting.


There really isn't anything more to say. Debate over.
 
ClydeFrog
David Bowie, Ayoob...
That's true to an extent. Massad Ayoob has wrote & spoke at length about how civil/criminal court lawyers use a firearm or it's custom features to push an agenda/legal arguement.
The main point is to AVOID these legal issues from the start by making smart choices & having a plan BEFORE a critical incident.
I use LE type sidearms & high quality, factory made ammunition for duty-protection because I want to lower the chances of bogus claims or "red herrings" in a use of force event.
The recent Zimmerman incident in Sanford Florida is a good example.
I've already read & saw a few legal "experts" and media reporters saying the pistol may have discharged by accident or by improper handling.
A "light" or target type trigger may be hard to defend in court under some conditions.

I'd add that top pistolsmith & sworn LE officer(SWAT), David Bowie of Bowie Tactical Concepts, does trigger work/actions on the M&P series. He'd be a good resource for protection-duty M&P work.
CF
Click to expand...

And that's why my nightstand weapon is a former LE gun loaded with factory ammunition produced for LE. Having a "modified" weapon adds to the headaches.
 
Debate over...hardly.:confused:

The first thing you must remember in any shooting is that you are now a criminal suspect. Even if it is 0:dark30 in your own home you have become a criminal suspect; if you killed the intruder it is for homicide. A homicide investigation WILL take place. At the end of that investigation it will be determined if it was lawful or unlawful. The laws may grant you a "Presumption of Fear" but you can easily invalidate that with just a few words. They are going to want to ask you a bunch of "routine" questions but "I'm on your side". The first and most important thing you need to do is get a good criminal defense attorney. Answer no questions until you have council present. End of discussion, say nothing. CSI is going to be doing their part...collecting evidence. The homicide investigator is going to do his part...collecting evidence via CSI and the interview with you. If you say something stupid like "I had a 12 gauge; I wasn't scared", you just moved from justifiable shooting to Murder 2. In states with a good castle doctrine law; you can either give yourself immunity from a civil suit to wide open path for anything goes. In other states, you can still make it harder for a civil suit if the DA declares it a justifiable shoot. And nothing says you can't counter sue the estate (family) of the person who just put you through the trauma of having to take anothers life. A good defense is a good offense.
 
I don't understand why there wouldn't be a difference between inside the home and outside the home use of a weapon with regard to modifications...or perhaps I am just naive. I've never been in a situation where I needed to defend my life or loved ones in the face of an attack, but I have to imagine that there's a whole lot more bull that an attacker could claim if you shoot him outside of your home (like, "I was just minding my business and he shot me") versus him being inside your home ("I was just minding my business" doesn't work if you've broken into someone's house.) If I'm walking around on the street with a race gun, kinda seems like I'm looking at defending myself on the street like it's a sport or that I'm not real worried about a gun accidentally going off...if it's in my house it seems like it's me wanting a more effective weapon to defend mine and my family's lives in my own territory that no one else has the right to be in (as opposed to going outside the home looking like I'm itching for a confrontation so I could pull out my race gun.)

In the end I'm sure all of the facts are considered and, hell, the fact that you have more than one gun in your home could probably be used to ridiculously assert that you love weapons because you're itching to hurt someone. The only way you're ever going to be safe legally is if you take do nothing when attacked.

Maybe a good mid point is to have a gun that comes stock with a heavy double action pull but the ability to follow up in single action quickly...this way no one can claim that you were negligent on the first shot and you can worry about stopping your threat with the second shot...

I can tell you this - I'm a newer gun owner and knowing that I could take someone's life with the thing makes me feel like being infinitely more careful. On the rare occasion that I do carry outside the home, I feel more need to avoid trouble/confrontation than without it. I don't know if all of you more experienced guys feel the same way or not.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
kozak6 said:
Why would there be any difference between having a lightened trigger on a CCW gun as opposed to a nightstand gun? I don't see any meaningful distinction.
Click to expand...

I guess my thinking is that if you are concealed carrying a gun around in public that has a modified trigger, you are going to be portrayed as someone itching to shoot someone whereas if you are protecting your home witha gun with a modified trigger, not so much.
 
Ayoob is one of the true experts in this field.

removing The magazine safety on a hi power is a common thing. An atty jumped on the presence of A pistol in the private collection that had one of several mechanisms disabled, not even the one used in the shooting.


There really isn't anything more to say. Debate over.
Click to expand...

All poodles are dogs not all dogs are poodles.....
 
We really need to stifle this "a good shoot is a good shoot" business.
Click to expand...

No one should believe that a "good shoot" is not going to result in a possibly tortured journey through the justice system.

It would appear that the shooter ended up going free in every one of your examples.
 
brickeyee said:
No one should believe that a "good shoot" is not going to result in a possibly tortured journey through the justice system.

It would appear that the shooter ended up going free in every one of your examples.
Click to expand...

But only after a gut wrenching, and in most of the cases, an expensive and ruinous excursion through the legal meat grinder. And there is always the risk that things won't turn out well. Fish went to prison until he won his appeal.

Some things one can do might increase the risks of a bad outcome in the legal system. Other things one might be able to do could decrease the risks of a bad outcome.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 
Posted by peacefulgary: Does anyone have a link to any self defense incident where the "good guy" was convicted solely for modifying the trigger on his handgun?
Click to expand...
Frank Ettin answered that.

Unless someone can show me a real life incident I'll just chalk it up as internet mythical nonsense.
Click to expand...
That is an extremely unwise way to look at things.

First, if the " 'good guy' was convicted", the case will not be listed as a "self defense incident".

Second, and Frank alluded to this also, there are have been many, many trials and many, many plea bargains, and there is no way on Earth to determine what things affected which ones and to what extent without interviewing all of the juries in all of the trials involving all of the shooting incidents that have taken place over the years in some five thousand plus county courtrooms.

That one has never heard of something is a very poor basis for discounting the potential risk.

There have been cases, and we know about them because some of our members have been involved in them and have written about them, in which modified triggers and safety devices have been used to create doubt regarding a shooter's testimony that a shooting was justified and intentional. That does two things: it moves the case into the realm of insurance coverage, which is to the financial advantage of a civil plaintiff's attorneys, and it reduces the threshold of proof from one of BARD to one of a preponderance of the evidence.

It should not take a rocket scientist to conclude from that that such modifications can entail a great deal of very unacceptable risk.
 
looking for trouble....

I disagree to an extent with the "looking for trouble" point.
If you carry a concealed firearm, you can't plan for or avoid who you may come into contact with or how they may act.
You also, due to economic conditions or your employment, need to travel or be in "bad areas". A LE officer or detective may question why you had a custom pistol or were going around in a rough area but you are entitled to protect yourself.
I agree too that, as a armed citizen(concealed license holder) that you should be a mature adult & avoid places where you may encounter trouble when possible.
Common sense & good judgement can go a long way.

CF
 
We really need to stifle this "a good shoot is a good shoot" business.
Click to expand...


Bullcrap. A shoot that saves your life, the lives of your loved ones or those around you is a "good shoot". That is the soul reason for the use of deadly force. Anyone that thinks they can pull a trigger and take another persons life without their life changing forever and the chance there may be repercussions has been watching too much TV. Anyone that straps on a CCW or places a loaded gun on their nightstand has to accept this fact. While my state and many others have castle doctrine laws or other protection from civil cases when the use of deadly force is used, we all need to realize that in most cases, we will be initially arrested and charged and our fate may well be in the hands of our peers. Still beats the hell outta being dead.
 
buck460XVR said:
Frank Ettin said:
We really need to stifle this "a good shoot is a good shoot" business.
Click to expand...
Bullcrap. A shoot that saves your life, the lives of your loved ones or those around you is a "good shoot". That is the soul (sic) reason for the use of deadly force....
Click to expand...
You obviously haven't been following the discussion.

The point is that people toss around that "a good shoot is a good shoot" nonsense as a reason not to concern themselves with various matters like their choice of gun, choice of ammunition, manner of dress and deportment, etc. But the reasons it is nonsense, are (1) that you won't be the one deciding if it was a "good shoot"; (2) various factors such folks like to dismiss are factors that have a potential for influencing those who will be the ones deciding if it was a good shoot; and (3) one will be happier with the outcome it those people making the decision do conclude it was a "good shoot."
 
Last edited:
Youi obviously haven't been following the discussion. (sic)
Click to expand...


Maybe Youi hasn't been following the discussion, but I have. Maybe you didn't read my post thoroughly.

The point is that people toss around that "a good shoot is a good shoot" nonsense as a reason not to concern themselves with various matters like their choice of gun, choice of ammunition, manner of dress and deportment, etc
Click to expand...

...........and how is that any different from folks tossing around, "you can't use this or you can't shoot that or you're gonna go to jail? Or "gotta shoot factory loads and non-modified guns or you'll get convicted of murder/manslaughter"?

Again, anybody that thinks that pulling a gun and killing someone, even in self defense, using all of the self appointed expert's approved ammo and firearms, is not gonna lead them into extreme scrutiny and possible criminal charges is living a dream. That was my point, along with the fact that any action that saves your life and/or the lives of your loved ones, regardless of the consequences, whether they are justified charges or not, is a "good shoot", and better than looking at the grass from the bottom side. This is where the saying "still better to be judged by twelve instead of being carried by six" comes from. If one really is in a situation where it is you or the other guy, would anyone really rather DIE than live to face possible wrongful charges? How about you or even your friend Youi?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top