Like several folks here, I'm a member of the ACLDN and their November, 2017 journal has an interesting Q & A with attorney Mark Seiden on the (potential) relationship between gun modifications and possible legal consequences.
Worth a read, imho.
https://armedcitizensnetwork.org/an-...-modifications
Great article- I think one quote that stands out to me was about civilians not acting like they are policeman.Originally Posted by blues
This country needs an enema- Blues approved sig line
Thanks for posting blues. Reinforces the need to avoid avoid avoid and the gun is the last resort.
The interview makes some of the minor modifications many owners do to their guns sound problematic. For example, installation of lighter hammer springs in Beretta 92 pistols. It's almost considered an essential upgrade by many Beretta owners -- but could be used against you in court. And just think of all the things done to Glocks and 1911s according to personal preference.
I'm pretty sure I've read @Mas say he's never seen smoothing-only brought up as an issue when the springs were all factory stock.
.
-----------------------------------------
Not another dime.
This is pretty well-trodden ground. In MAG-40/20 Classroom @Mas explains that any modifications to the gun should be to make it safer and more reliable. Better sights make it easier to hit the intended target. A smoother, more consistent trigger pull that does not go below the manufacturer's specs makes the shot more controllable. Grip modifications make the gun more controllable. As discussed to death elsewhere, punisher skulls (for example) don't help. Etc.
You may need to be prepared to explain on the witness stand (or have an expert do so) why that particular modification is helpful. This is why you pay a lawyer and may need to pay an expert witness.
Recovering Gun Store Commando. My Blog: The Clue Meter
“It doesn’t matter what the problem is, the solution is always for us to give the government more money and power, while we eat less meat.”
Glenn Reynolds
Every time this topic comes up it is often tied with a 20-30 year old case with other significant circumstances (racial politics) or gross negligence by a poorly trained person. Often the same 3-5 cases are the only ones that are given as examples.
I do not completely disagree with the advice given to stay near stock. It just seems like if it was such a major issue more experts other than Ayoob and those affiliated with him would be talking about it.
Last edited by Artemas2; 10-31-2017 at 05:25 PM.
The point is that you are rolling the dice and you will need to be able to justify EVERYTHING you did to your carry piece. Given the fact that we are a more and more litigious society it makes perfect sense. No one talks about it because its not going to get instagram followers talking about not having a punisher skull on your backplate...
Why is that so hard to do? Why is a Glock 34/35 with a 4lb trigger and a longish pull impossible to justify, but a factory 1911 is a non-issue?
Last edited by Artemas2; 10-31-2017 at 05:29 PM.
No one is saying its hard to do but if you modify it then you have to justify it. It's all about how much liability do you want to take on or how much explaining you have to do. If you feel that you can reasonably explain why you did X Y or Z to your pistol go for it, but rest assured that the prosecution will hit you for X Y and Z.
Reply With Quote