legit advice on modifications?

[Joe in PNG]

I wonder- if you're in a politically sensitive shooting situation similar to Zimmerman or Alvarez, wouldn't the prosecution be pretty much throwing any and everything at you, trying to see what would stick?
Such as hollowpoint bullets, "high-capacity" standard capacity mags, carrying with a loaded chamber, carrying a semi-automatic pistol instead of a revolver, carrying a backup gun, carrying a spare mag, carrying at that time and place, attending firearms training classes, and so on.

[BillSWPA]

I wonder- if you're in a politically sensitive shooting situation similar to Zimmerman or Alvarez, wouldn't the prosecution be pretty much throwing any and everything at you, trying to see what would stick?
Such as hollowpoint bullets, "high-capacity" standard capacity mags, carrying with a loaded chamber, carrying a semi-automatic pistol instead of a revolver, carrying a backup gun, carrying a spare mag, carrying at that time and place, attending firearms training classes, and so on.

Any decision you make can be portrayed as showing evil intent. A big part of the answer is to make reasonable decisions, be prepared to explain and demonstrate why your decisions were reasonable, and to avoid those decisions that are clearly going to be problematic in front of a fact finder.

If your decisions are truly reasonable, and reflect what knowledgeable people do, a prosecutor trying to portray those decisions as bad is setting themselves up to be made to look like an idiot.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bucky]

An easy solution would be to just buy a factory new, G configured PX4 to eliminate this potential line of inquiry.

This seems like the best approach. While silly, it is cheap insurance.

Consider this, if something were to happen 4 years from now, there’s a good chance that one or more members of the jury had eaten Tide pods, or snorted condoms.

Hedge your bets to the lowest common denominator.

[BehindBlueI's]

I wonder- if you're in a politically sensitive shooting situation similar to Zimmerman or Alvarez, wouldn't the prosecution be pretty much throwing any and everything at you, trying to see what would stick?

Yes. Even if it's not a politically sensitive shooting. Civil trial may never make the news, but the worse you look the more $$$ for the guy painting you as a reckless asshole.

Which is a good reason to limit there "ammo". The more they have to throw, the more a pattern can stick in the heads of the uninformed jurors, and the more likely they are to believe at least some of it.

I've personally not seen the capacity of a weapon (revolver vs semi-auto) come up in screening decisions (where it's decided if criminal charges will be filed), but number of shots fired has. I have seen type of ammo (Green tip 5.56 specifically), but it was more of an aggravating factor in a clearly bad shoot.

[BehindBlueI's]

What's the opinion of caliber conversion barrels with otherwise stock Glock? 27/9mm precisely. Vetted, and have carried it occasionally. I've also considered it for EDC in that configuration. I guess it *is* a change that could be trouble... "So, you wanted higher capacity for slaying more people..."

I think as you are replicating a factory setup, it's not a huge opening. It's an authorized modification for an off duty qualified pistol for us, which indicates City Legal is fine with it.

[ralph]

What BBI said.

This is why LAPD, NYPD, Montreal PD after Crown v. Gossett, Miami PD after FL v. Alvarez, etc. modified their revolvers to double action only. Not only because a cocked revolver was more likely to AD or ND, but because a revolver with cocking capability intact gave opposing counsel the opening to argue that at WAS a "negligent cocked gun hair trigger discharge" when in FACT it was an intentional, justifiable shot.

Interestingly, in decades of doing this type of case, I've never seen the allegation that the trigger pull was too SMOOTH. Every single time, the allegation was "the trigger pull was too LIGHT." Nor did I ever see an allegation of a "double action only hair trigger."

When you are in shark-filled waters, it is wise to keep as much blood out of the water as possible beforehand.

On another board, where the subject pistol is'nt a Glock, but is a striker fired pistol with no manual saftey, A number of folks have taken to replacing the trigger with an aftermarket trigger, springs, and the also do some polishing..The results of all this is a reduction in trigger pull weight from 5lbs from the factory, to as light as 3lbs 5oz. I posed a question asking if these guys were using these guns as target, gamer, or as carry guns.. Noting that IMO, that under 4lbs is getting kinda light for a carry gun with no manual saftey. I got one reply, this from a guy who admitted he uses his pistol for both EDC,as well as gaming, and target practice, he has admitted elsewhere in the same thread that his pistol's trigger is now 3lbs 14oz..scary light for a SF pistol with no manual saftey, in his reply to my question, he said, that his trigger finger was his manual saftey.. I just wonder if he has any idea how much trouble he's possibly letting himself in for..

[Mas]

On another board, where the subject pistol isn't a Glock, but is a striker fired pistol with no manual saftey, A number of folks have taken to replacing the trigger with an aftermarket trigger, springs, and the also do some polishing..The results of all this is a reduction in trigger pull weight from 5lbs from the factory, to as light as 3lbs 5oz. I posed a question asking if these guys were using these guns as target, gamer, or as carry guns.. Noting that IMO, that under 4lbs is getting kinda light for a carry gun with no manual saftey. I got one reply, this from a guy who admitted he uses his pistol for both EDC,as well as gaming, and target practice, he has admitted elsewhere in the same thread that his pistol's trigger is now 3lbs 14oz..scary light for a SF pistol with no manual saftey, in his reply to my question, he said, that his trigger finger was his manual safety.. I just wonder if he has any idea how much trouble he's possibly letting himself in for..

Ralph, the answer is that your friend is opening the door to a lot of trouble. We've discussed earlier why both the politically-motivated prosecutor and the greed-motivated plaintiff's lawyer with an unmeritorious case may frame your intentional self-defense shooting as an indefensible negligent discharge. The defense of "I never put my finger in the trigger guard unless I intend to fire" is flawed from the get-go, because it translates as "I never make a mistake." Your friend can expect opposing counsel to say, "Mr. Defendant, we know you're supposed to keep your finger off the trigger -- and we are saying that you made a mistake and did so! Are you telling this jury that you are the first perfect human being incapable of making a mistake to walk this Earth in 2018 years?" They're trying to frame your friend as an arrogant SOB who marches to his own drummer, and he has walked right into the trap. Any of us can ask our own mothers if they think we are perfect human beings incapable of making a mistake; Mom's answer will give a preview of how well that will fly in front of a jury.

A clever lawyer on the other side may even, in his opening statement, tell the jury: "This defendant is so arrogant he can't bring himself to admit his terrible mistake. Why, he'll probably get in front of you like Inspector Clouseau and say, 'I meant to do zat.'" And now, when your friend does present exactly that defense, he fulfills opposing counsel's prophecy.

[Drang]

in his reply to my question, he said, that his trigger finger was his manual saftey.. I just wonder if he has any idea how much trouble he's possibly letting himself in for..

You might point out to him that anything he has posted on the Internet is public domain, and discoverable, which means it is grist for the prosecutor's or plainiff's mill.

You might also point out that, if he is quoting an incident depicted in a certain movie, the Operator being quoted admitted that he was actually in the wrong in that incident, and regretted it.

[ralph]

Ralph, the answer is that your friend is opening the door to a lot of trouble. We've discussed earlier why both the politically-motivated prosecutor and the greed-motivated plaintiff's lawyer with an unmeritorious case may frame your intentional self-defense shooting as an indefensible negligent discharge. The defense of "I never put my finger in the trigger guard unless I intend to fire" is flawed from the get-go, because it translates as "I never make a mistake." Your friend can expect opposing counsel to say, "Mr. Defendant, we know you're supposed to keep your finger off the trigger -- and we are saying that you made a mistake and did so! Are you telling this jury that you are the first perfect human being incapable of making a mistake to walk this Earth in 2018 years?" They're trying to frame your friend as an arrogant SOB who marches to his own drummer, and he has walked right into the trap. Any of us can ask our own mothers if they think we are perfect human beings incapable of making a mistake; Mom's answer will give a preview of how well that will fly in front of a jury.

A clever lawyer on the other side may even, in his opening statement, tell the jury: "This defendant is so arrogant he can't bring himself to admit his terrible mistake. Why, he'll probably get in front of you like Inspector Clouseau and say, 'I meant to do zat.'" And now, when your friend does present exactly that defense, he fulfills opposing counsel's prophecy.

Mas:
Just to be clear, I don't know this gent, so, he's not a friend of mine..I simply posted a question in order to see what kind of answers I'd get..
Trolling? Yeah, I suppose so, I'll admit I was kinda shocked by the answer I got..

[Glenn E. Meyer]

If your decisions are truly reasonable, and reflect what knowledgeable people do, a prosecutor trying to portray those decisions as bad is setting themselves up to be made to look like an idiot.

And you know that how? Seriously, some studies show that wearing glasses influences a jury. How do you know that a jury of non-experts will think your decisions are reasonable? One can test that before hand with mock jury for lots and lots of money.

I'll play the game for Charley the Homeowner. DA - you modified the gun in manner X because trained military and law enforcement have used such trigger mechanisms? So you think of yourself as a military or law enforcement person? Did that influence you to take a violent action inappropriate for a homeowner? Has the defendant X trained up to the level with the modification in the manner that the military and law enforcement do? OH, you have trained and competed intensively?

While Ms. Steele says that is a good thing for a defendant, IIRC and your lawyer can make the point - competition and training has come up as a negative in some trials, if I also recall correctly.