Thank you for the reply. So based on that, it is possible a lab could return an opinion that a 1911 used in a defensive shooting has a "hair trigger". In which case someone with knowledge of the type, including the redundant safety mechanisms, would be needed to balance that opinion. Or am I interpreting that incorrectly?Originally Posted by psalms144.1
Would they typically note if it differed from the standard pull, or just that the trigger pull was X?
An additional factor of note, if it went to trial, you as defendant are not going to be the one explaining why your brick, er Glockonly has a 4 lb trigger pull, as you won't be on the stand. Your defense attorney will have to introduce that via another method, or not address it at all.
Thats why I don't actually carry a pistol anymore, just an angry fat wiener dog who will bite your face off, but is irresistibly cute.
Last edited by Zincwarrior; 09-11-2017 at 01:57 PM.
Our head lab guy is a complete gun nerd. Can't speak to other labs.
From my rather limited perspective ... these days there is a tendency for advocates, social justice warriors, plaimtiffs attorneys, and the like to do the damndest to make an issue of everything. Throw enough mud, real or imagined - especially imagined - against the wall and hope something, anything sticks to get the outcome you believe you should get.
I carried custom 1911s for my first few decades in the business - stock trigger? uhm, no. The M&P45 I carried for a year had been back to the performance center for action/trigger work before Apex came on the scene. Heck, I've got a 92F I'm getting ready to send to Robar for work, incl the action/trigger. I am aware of shootings involving firearms with action/trigger jobs where that was never even discussed afterwards.
As many others have said, written, I want a clean and usable trigger that doesn't compromise the built-in safeties - not necessarily a lighter one. Just be able to explain why you did what you did or had done to the gun and why. Caveat: don't do stupid stuff like adding dust covers (or slide plates) that say inflamatory things.
Where one could have major issues is with a claim the shooting was the result of an ND, UD, or AD and one installed some after-market, sub-standard POS trigger that bypassed safeties or did not have proper engagement.
There's two answers to this.
One:whos doing the work is an important variable . My current carry gun is a Beretta M9A1 that's received custom work from Wilson Combat. That is a professional firm of expert gunsmiths who are certified SMEs in the Beretta 92, and as such the legitimacy of their credibility to modify a Beretta isn't in question. When Wilson Combat says a part is safe for carry,it's backed by the word of more then Somedood in a garage with a website.
Which brings me to the second part: with striker fired guns there are a lot of people and firms selling dodgy trigger parts and kits with no certified background on it. How many retailers of Glock trigger parts are certified by them to work on the guns? How many spring kit retailers designed a model alongside the Glock production line?
It is in this way that the guy who sends his gun in for trigger work by a qualified firm differs greatly in a legal sense from the guy dremeling his pistol at home. The first sends his gun in for qualified modification; the second is viewed as negligently damaging a deadly weapon. Watching a dozen YouTube videos ,going to a tactical class and "shooting for twenty years" does not mean one is qualified to work on pistols.
Since your D spring is a factory part which is in fact a standard feature on their M9A3, I doubt you'd be in trouble for using it. Sticking a 12lb competition only Beretta hammer spring into your carry pistol on your kitchen table is a very different story.
The Minority Marksman.
"When you meet a swordsman, draw your sword: Do not recite poetry to one who is not a poet."
-a Ch'an Buddhist axiom.
For us, it's something like "factory specifications for (whatever gun) fall in the XX.X - XX.X range. (tested gun) was tested and has a trigger pull weight of XX.X"
Thanks!
I had a case where one store clerk shot a robber in the back of the head, near contact, while said robber was threatening another clerk at gun point. It was such a good shoot, with so many witnesses, and so much evidence, the prosecutor who came to the scene declared it a good shoot before we even asked the shooter if he wanted to give a statement. That's one end of the spectrum.
I had another case that stemmed from a domestic situation. Ex-bf comes to assassinate ex-gf. Ex-gf knows he's coming and is trying to move out, but is afraid he'll get there before she can get all of her stuff. Two "cousins" and "Dad" come to move, and set up a ambush in case he shows. He does.
There were at least three shooters on "home team" and two shooters on "visiting team". One of "home team" was a felon. One of "visiting team" was ID'd but never firmly tied to the case. While the "home team" was eventually cleared for self defense (and defense of necessity for the felon to temporarily take up a hand gun), it was a much longer and more arduous process. No uninvolved witnesses, an outside scene that was less than clear as far as who started the shooting, etc. Social media became an important one in figuring out who the primary aggressor was in that one. It was a "good shoot" eventually, but if one side starts getting painted as assholes/vigilantes/bloodthirsty morons...that colors the perception of the prosecutor deciding who's offense and who's defense. Even ignoring the civil side (which you shouldn't do, but for the sake of argument), explaining modifications and defending them as increasing not only your own safety but the safety of the community helps ease that.
I think people imagine that every shooting is like the first one. It's clear cut, it's provable, and (criminally) that's pretty much it. Few are as jacked up as the second one, but defensive shootings exist on a spectrum. Even something that starts as a good shoot can become criminal if you don't stop shooting once the suspect is no longer a threat. If you don't think your modified trigger is potentially in play if you are charged with something because your first three shots were good but the forth was excessive (in the mind of the prosecutor) than yes, they are going to use anything they can to show that last shot was willful, negligent, malicious, whatever narrative they have assigned you. You may know it was just a matter of reaction speed, you may have expert witnesses to attest to that, but you'll still have to answer that narrative.
What's are your guys thoughts on changing springs in revolvers to bring down the pull weight?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"Shooting is 90% mental. The rest is in your head." -Nils
What are these mythical "revolvers" you speak of?
Reply With Quote