quote:

Originally posted by HRK:
5 Cases that show the dangers of a hair trigger

Each of those are cops. And shit shows.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:
You would think if it were near the boogeyman that people make it out to be that there would be at least ONE case that could be pointed to.

I don't ask the impossible. I ask for facts to back up opinions.

Don't like what I have to say? Change my opinion with fact.

Why so confrontational? You might be a shit hot cop and firearms instructor, but you are very closed minded. I don’t care if you share my opinion, nor do I feel the need to convince you that there are risks involved. Nowhere have I said a mod would turn a good shoot bad.
I can tell you that spouting off platitudes and stomping your feet and demanding the name of a case where a mod impacted the outcome does not change the fact that there are risks in carrying a modded pistol.

Don’t agree, fine then, carry on. I for one will rely on my personal experience in cases I have actually litigated and my personal experience representing officers scared shitless over some irrelevant issue with a weapon that shows up in an expert’s opinion or plaintiff counsel’s argument.

I'm getting the picture that you don't like the unwashed challenging your opinions by asking simply for you to back them up with case law?

You've used "rolls eyes". You then accused me of being sarcastic and disrespectful. Now, I'm closed minded and confrontational.

What's up with all the personal stuff?

If you don't like my opinion, or disagree with it, you could have simply ignored it. But, you chose to post rolls eyes and ridicule it. And now you're telling me how much you don't care? Is this one of your court strategies that you use because I am completely at a loss.

quote:

Originally posted by JDSigManiac:

demanding the name of a case where a mod impacted the outcome

my personal experience in cases I have actually litigated

I think Jerry is asking you to enlighten us with your actual experience. I'd also like to see actual case law - what's so confrontational about that?

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:

quote:

Originally posted by HRK:
5 Cases that show the dangers of a hair trigger

Each of those are cops. And shit shows.

I would agree police shootings are held to a higher standard, and hard rules on modifications to police firearms and equipment are there to protect the city/government from massive civil judgement.

It appears the implied point of "those are all cops" is that if one isn't a cop they are immune to any malicious prosecution, including the use of a modified firearm.

Take Zimmerman, (I know not the best person to use) it didn't matter that he used a cheap unmodified firearm, it only mattered that the victim wasn't white and he was railroaded through the press, legal system, and the white house and the prosecution went after him with a vengeance... Just think if he'd had a "smile wait for flash" barrel or a modified trigger, if anyone thinks the prosecutor would have left that off the table they are sorely mistaken.

Modify whatever you want, but to think that some prosecutor isn't going to use that against someone that isn't a LEO is a mistake.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:
I'm getting the picture that you don't like the unwashed challenging your opinions by asking simply for you to back them up with case law?

You've used "rolls eyes". You then accused me of being sarcastic and disrespectful. Now, I'm closed minded and confrontational.

What's up with all the personal stuff?

If you don't like my opinion, or disagree with it, you could have simply ignored it. But, you chose to post rolls eyes and ridicule it. And now you're telling me how much you don't care? Is this one of your court strategies that you use because I am completely at a loss.

I have tried to be objective and share personal experiences for those who are interested. You have been unnecessarily confrontational from the outset. I acknowledged the validity of your opinion, and never once said anything other than there was a risk associated. You seem steadfast in your position that its all BS unless you see case law on it. Only a fraction of cases, civil and criminal, go to trial. Of those, only a fraction of verdicts, both civil and criminal, get appealed which is what generates legal opinions. Even those that are decided on appeal do not reflect every issue at the trial court, so unless the issue of mods is the subject of appeal, then there would be no opinion on it. The universe of cases and jury verdicts where these issues could have been at play is both incalculable and infinitely greater than the cases reported on appeal. So yes, your demand for “case law” supporting the risks is seeking the impossible, because there is no way to determine what cases it became an issue in. Even the absence of a reported opinion does not validate your position. I offered my personal experience because I’ve seen it with my own eyes, in real-life police shootings. A reasonable inference from my small sample size is that it happens elsewhere.

Your unwillingness to consider an alternative to your firmly held belief that the issue is BS unless someone can show you a case on it is, by definition, closed minded. Your defiant reliance on your opinion to the exclusion of all others warrants a rolls eyes. Objectively, your posts have been confrontational. But I guess your comments about my opinions of the “unwashed masses” and mischaracterization of my posts as “ridiculing” yours makes you feel better. I have explained why the “case law” you so desperately seek is likely unavailable, but you disagree and persist. I also decline your invitation to spend time researching the issue.

Have a nice day.

quote:

Originally posted by HRK:

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:

quote:

Originally posted by HRK:
5 Cases that show the dangers of a hair trigger

Each of those are cops. And shit shows.

I would agree police shootings are held to a higher standard, and hard rules on modifications to police firearms and equipment are there to protect the city/government from massive civil judgement.

It appears the implied point of "those are all cops" is that if one isn't a cop they are immune to any malicious prosecution, including the use of a modified firearm.

Take Zimmerman, (I know not the best person to use) it didn't matter that he used a cheap unmodified firearm, it only mattered that the victim wasn't white and he was railroaded through the press, legal system, and the white house and the prosecution went after him with a vengeance... Just think if he'd had a "smile wait for flash" barrel or a modified trigger, if anyone thinks the prosecutor would have left that off the table they are sorely mistaken.

Modify whatever you want, but to think that some prosecutor isn't going to use that against someone that isn't a LEO is a mistake.

As I said on the last page, this thread has taken the turn to where it completely misses the point.

Can you produce evidence that a good shoot has been turned to a bad shoot based solely upon a trigger job?

I've asked this question for years. None of the best can answer it with anything other than "It CAN HAPPEN TO YOU".

Ok. Check. It can happen.

Bear attacks can also happen to me. If I choose to disregard the facts that bear attacks can happen, I do so at my own peril. When I ask around, no one can provide instances of bear attacks actually happening to someone who doesn't do dumb things. So, I don't worry about bear attacks much.

Then dudes come along and tell me that I should worry more about bear attacks because of their experience with shark attacks. When you point out that shark attacks and bear attacks are completely different, they scoff and say "It is foolish to disregard the shark attack. It can happen to you".

Ok. It can happen. However, I can be kidnapped by aliens because there are guys that say they've seen it. It could happen.

But, it my experience, doing day to day life, and actually studying case law on this, the chance of it happening to a citizen in a free state on a good shoot is minuscule. Maybe even smaller than minuscule.

When it actually becomes a legitimate problem in America instead of an imagined one, I'll get concerned.

Or people can show me case law that would change my opinion.

This issue is probably closer to Bigfoot. Everybody knows a guy, but you can't actually find anyone that has seen it for themselves.

[/QUOTE]
Everybody knows a guy, but you can't actually find anyone that has seen it for themselves.[/QUOTE]

I did.

I had a conversation of sorts with Mas Ayoob about this. My take-away from it was that you can smooth and polish and improve the trigger pull, but he strongly advised against a lighter-than-factory trigger pull.

Personally, I don't know shit, but I try to listen and pay attention.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:
Fine. Show us cases. Actual case law of individual citizens in free states that got jammed in criminal prosecution due to trigger jobs. Or Punisher grips.

Define getting jammed. Last one of the Punisher grips type that I remember was that Mesa cop with you fvcked imprint on their AR dustcover. The plaintiff's lawyer argued a bloodthirst intent.

You know what happened? Plaintiff's Lawyer argued it in front of a judge. Judge dismissed it, the jury never saw it, the cop was acquitted. Success, eh, inadmissible?

You know what else happened?
Lawyer's time clock was on while he was arguing that dustcover in front of a judge.
Happily criminally acquitted cop had to declare bankruptcy after that trial.
Just in time to find out that Justice Dept opened up their own investigation.
That's before any civil trials.

Think that dustcover was totally inconsequential?

Numerous attorneys who work in the field has pointed out that the plaintiff's line may never even take a "good shoot vs bad shoot" direction.
A well known attorney pointed out that case law is only generated by the appellate courts and minority of cases reach that level. He pretty much said that if you're asking for a case law, you don't understand how the system works.


JDSigManiac, it was an excellent post on your part. I am not familiar with criminal litigation but well familiar with other types of cases where completely circumstantial stuff was made into a focal point, at a minimum protracting the trials, expenses, and nerve expenditure. I used to be in a "show me a case" camp, but after getting some insight how the litigation system works, I am no longer there.

quote:

Originally posted by esdunbar:
I'm still waiting for someone to tell me how all facts being the exact same, a 4 lbs trigger vs a 12 lbs trigger would matter. If someone can give me an example, I have an open mind, I just can't think of a scenario where it would/will matter.

They will not because they cannot. There is the fear of it coming up in court and the associated cost. Unscrupulous prosecutors may bring it up.

JDSigManiac has made some good points that should be considered. A stock gun is fine for many people. Certainly incorporating some of the advice offered makes sense. Silly changes, like Punisher logos, obvious competition mods, etc should be avoided. But, mods can be done so long as the change is logical in the context of self-defense.

The reality is that the gun should be within functional specification. This makes sense for both safety and durability of the gun. For a 1911, that could mean a 3.5 to 8 pound trigger. For a Glock, it means a 5.5 to 11 pound weight (standard to NY-2). Modifying a Springer 1911 trigger from 5-7 pounds (standard on their guns) down to 3.5# won’t take it out of spec. If you think it may, you can always call SACS and ask a gunsmith what the acceptable range the factory recommends since that is what they would submit to the court. For Glocks, adding 3.5# Glock connector with NY-1 trigger spring vastly improves smoothness and reset while increasing the weight by approximately 1/2 to 1 pound. Both guns with those modifications would be within the factory spec. The prosecutor could complain about it, but the defense would be able to rebuff the accusation.

Again, there is fear about the topic, but little stated in both stats for success and failure on those accusations. Strategies for combating such tactics are available, including in Ayoob’s MAG-20 class.

The main problem I see is too little thought is put into preplanning for court in the time before a self-defense event. Gun forums operate slightly above the level of gun store “advice”, but do have the advantage of time to research and present the arguments. Many seem to wave their hand and say “Police Department X says so, so therefore it must be true for civilian defenders”. But, such statements are misleading. Certainly, one could duplicate the firearm and ammunition used by the local PD as a strategy. However, it is far better to be able to offer a logical explanation for the mod. Otherwise, when the ridiculous statement “You used a policeman’s gun! Do you think you are a cop?” is made, you had better be able to speak logically about it.

Logically, changing sights, smoothing the action, adding a light, deburring the gun, refinishing worn parts, and beveling the magazine well are all functional changes that improve the shooting experience. Presenting the logic behind these changes, in addition to days of preparing the jury with DVD’s and expert testimony, will influence the jury in the way you want it to go.

I urge everyone reading these posts to join a concealed carry insurance org like Armed Citizens Legal Defense Network, USCCA, and similar. They will send you materials to study. Keep print their books around that you sign as read. DVD’s should be also signed and dated. All this can be used in court to educate the jury about self-defense generally and how logical gun mods relate to it.

quote:

Originally posted by HRK:
5 Cases that show the dangers of a hair trigger

Ayoob has testified in cases where the defendent was up against the state for charges regarding a shooting, and, the triggers of the firearms were brought up by the prosecution.

When you clam Self Defense that doesn't stop the prosecutor from trying to get you on negligence, or to paint you as a "happy trigger person", looking for a fight, or any other charge. Just look at George Zimmerman, and regardless of your thoughts about him, what an unfavorable light he was cast in due to the current political situation in DC and a POTUS that decided to comment on the victim 'If I had a son...."

The point about not having modified triggers is simply that it eliminates that from becoming part of the prosecutions case against you, or a civil attorney, or both using it to paint a picture of the shooter in an unfavorable light.

There are D prosecutors in larger metro areas that are anti firearm in every state, TX, FL, KY, TN and civil attorneys just want your money.

We're talking about Carry guns, not range guns, probably not a great idea to put "Smile wait for Flash" barrels, or Molon Labe grips, born to kill glock end plates on your carry.

Folks have the right to disagree, carry what you like, for whatever reason you feel justifies that decision... Just don't expect the law to respect your right to modify that firearm after a defensive shooting.

See this is the false logic that people like to use here.

Those are all cases where a gun ACCIDENTALLY discharged and someone was killed. If you want to argue that a lighter trigger can lead to a negligent discharge, fine, I won't argue with you. That's a training issue and some folks are truly safer with a heavier trigger.

But these weren't cases where someone intentionally pulled the trigger and shot someone.

You're arguing something we're not talking about.

Everyone makes good points and IMO there is no “right” or “wrong” answer. People who want to carry a modded gun should do so if they want to. They should also consider what kind of mods. Clearly, putting night sights on is different than installing a 3#competition trigger.

My only recommendation is to think about it before doing it.

Good discussion topic....

If you are fortunate enough to live in a free state and it was a good shoot, I wouldn’t think the trigger job would be concerning. OTOH, if you live in a nanny state, even with a good shoot, the trigger job is one fact an unscrupulous prosecutor could add to his/her made up ones to nail you.

My whole life I have been hearing things like this. Others are that if you have ever taken a class it shows your desire to kill someone... Yet when there have been stories of a SD shooting in the news I never hear of people being prosecuted for an accessorized gun or having taken classes on how to kill people, or etc.

Lawyers can spin any fact (ie, training or lack of) to their favor.

Just like adding Tritium night sights could be claimed that you wanted to shoot people at night. An argument can be made for or against damn near anything.

quote:

An argument can be made for or against damn near anything.

You're right. I know someone who once bought a gun; and since he bought a gun, he must want to kill someone. There couldn't be any other possible reason why he bought it. Oh, and I almost forgot; he goes to the range all the time to practice...no doubt practicing to kill someone.


Frank

quote:

Just a question, if you shoot a lot and the trigger has smoothed out/lightened up due to use/age with no mods, how would they be able to prove otherwise?

[/QUOTE]Like in everything, it has zero to do with what they can prove. And everything to do with what they can allege. Crime labs in Kentucky DO NOT do any of this on a regular basis in crime guns. I guess other states do, and some get DNA back before the first commercial break.

Also, just to point out, take any examples that are police related with a grain of salt. Getting a family member shot by the po-leece is the ghetto lotto. Because the city has deep pockets on a judgement. If they could only sue cops you’d see a lot less, I guarantee.[/QUOTE]

Thanks JL

Where’s the case?!
Where’s the case?
Where’s the case?

If it can happen, it already has. Show me the case.