legit advice on modifications?

[Glenn E. Meyer]

We and every other forum has discussed this intensively. I'll spare the long repetitive post. Not a lawyer but a cognitive psychologist who has studied decision making a touch and researched it a bit.

So bullet points so to speak:

1. If you are on trial, it's not a good shoot and not obvious it was self-defense to some

2. You will object to a gun issue. Not a lawyer but a panel of lawyers had a discussion that I read and they said in their jurisdictions it was 50/50 if the objection was upheld.

3. Jury research on objections (ref to follow):
a. Juries are not necessarily intelligent and rational decision makers.
b. They make take from your objection that the issue was really bad because you are waving your arms about.
c. In deliberation they make not remember a complex argument from your expert. They just remember the topic that the issue is a bad thing. Better vett your expert. Get a test jury (that costs).
d. Can't trust gun folk to support you. Studies show that they might think the gun issue indicates you are a doofus for it as it clashes with their 'expert' view.
e. The prosecution may not have to make a big deal about it (I OBJECT), they can simply describe the gun as a fact without histronics. Such increased exposure has influenced juries without histronics.

4. Your intuitions or your lawyers' intuitions tell him or her that such an issue makes no difference. Expert intuition can suck in many situations (read Kahneman's book - Thinking Fast and Slow, summary https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thinking,_Fast_and_Slow

The classic case was OJ from what I read. Marcia Clark had an intuition about African-American women on the jury that was contrary to her jury experts. Guess who was correct?

A good read on jury decisions in general (not just gun world) to show important factors is:

Devine: Jury Decison Making: The state of the science.

If I had to have a lawyer defend me, I would want one who had reasonable expertise in firearms issues and how decision making occurs. Did they read, take a CLE, or other seminar on such? Will they test their strategy?

Whether the OP issue's might influence someone - well, get me the Galactic Corps Lens from Arisia and I'll tell you.

BTW, if you get 3 or 4 people who buy your position from the get go (opening statement) with the rest unsure, they seem to carry the day, according to some studies.

[BehindBlueI's]

I think the first question when buying or possibly modifying a firearm for self-defense is how can you best put yourself in a situation to survive, not beat a rap.

Luckily, you can have both. If you require major modification to a handgun to shoot well enough to get through a self-defense shooting then you should consider two options. One, you suck. Train and practice to remedy that. Two, you chose unwisely. There's a wide variety of factory guns and if you chose one you can't shoot well, try something else. If you can't shoot a particular revolver to save your own ass without reducing trigger weight...maybe you shouldn't be carrying that revolver instead of trying to cut the trigger pull weight in half. If you want Glock weight trigger pulls...buy a Glock. If you want 1911 trigger pulls...well, you see where I'm going with this.

Regardless of if you are shooting because someone is trying to kill you, if you're preventing a forcible felony, defense of others, etc. the marginal gains to be had in hardware modification aren't particularly significant in winning a gunfight.

When you are confronted with the level of violence where may have to use a firearm, if you are contemplating how a jury may think of this that or another, you may already be in trouble..

I completely agree. The time to worry about it is now, before you are in that situation. Know the law and have a plan now. Know how to interact with responding officers now. I've been through the process myself and investigated a butt ton of others. Nothing I carry is modified by anyone other than the OEM or by my department's armorer. The only non-OEM parts are sights. For a hunting gun, range play-toy, I play by different rules. For anything that can (or has) gotten me in a deposition or subpoena'd to a grand jury? OEM. No engravings, no out of factory spec trigger weights no gee-whiz trigger kits, etc. It is one less thing to worry about.

I'm in the camp that "buying skill" might get you from 95% to 100% of your potential, but it's training and correct practice that gets you from 0% to 95%. Unless you've worked your way to 95%, spend the "new trigger money" on training.

So much this. There's also diminishing returns in pure technical skill. Shaving a .05 seconds off your split time simply isn't that valuable in the context of fighting. Without going down that particular rabbit hole, shooting is often the easy part.

[BehindBlueI's]

If you can buy the configuration or send it to someone to get it made that way, there's no reasonable argument against using it.

The problem is the assumption only reasonable arguments are made. When I got depo'd for wrongful death, I was asked about hobbies. Obviously my hobbies have nothing to do with how justified my use of force was. I was asked if I had a Facebook account (no). Again, nothing to do with why were supposedly there, that I'd wrongfully killed someone.

Particularly in a civil suit, arguments don't have to be reasonable as long as they are legally permissible. They can be strictly to confuse a jury and for theater. I've been asked if I performed forensic tests that don't actually exist. The attorney knew it didn't exist, and had to know I knew. But the jury didn't know.

Now, that said, I agree with you that sights and OEM configuration swaps are very easy to defend and aren't likely to be made into hay, even in a civil suit. I think it's a bit far to say just because you can get one means you can modify something else to get there. Just because you can buy a pre-lock S&W doesn't mean hay can't be made about your "disabling a safety" by removing the lock in an ILS equipped S&W. Again, keep in mind the goal is to confuse the jury and create a narrative about you. Even though the lock is a storage lock, not a safety, why allow the possibility of the argument?

[JCS]

I’m curious.... BBL, Mas, etc. would these same rules apply to revolvers? I ask because one of the most common things people recommend for j frames is an apex duty spring kit. Would you recommend against these as well?

[BehindBlueI's]

I’m curious.... BBL, Mas, etc. would these same rules apply to revolvers? I ask because one of the most common things people recommend for j frames is an apex duty spring kit. Would you recommend against these as well?

A modified gun is a modified gun, revolver or rifle isn't the issue. Does the Apex kit drop it below factory specs as far as trigger weight? If so, refer back to Mas' comments on "easier to shoot...but easier to shoot".

Personally, I do not put spring kits in "for real use" guns. Others may draw the line differently, and it will *almost certainly* not be an issue. However not having it there removes the "almost"...

[JCS]

A modified gun is a modified gun, revolver or rifle isn't the issue. Does the Apex kit drop it below factory specs as far as trigger weight? If so, refer back to Mas' comments on "easier to shoot...but easier to shoot".

Personally, I do not put spring kits in "for real use" guns. Others may draw the line differently, and it will *almost certainly* not be an issue. However not having it there removes the "almost"...

Thank you for your response. That’s what I figured. I heard Andrew Branca discussing the fact that the prosecutor in the Zimmerman case used the fact that he was carrying with a round in the chamber and tried to paint him as a killer because of that.

This thread is timely and I’m going to switch all my defensive guns back to stock. Aftermarket parts are a rabbit hole anyways

[Mas]

A modified gun is a modified gun, revolver or rifle isn't the issue. Does the Apex kit drop it below factory specs as far as trigger weight? If so, refer back to Mas' comments on "easier to shoot...but easier to shoot".

Personally, I do not put spring kits in "for real use" guns. Others may draw the line differently, and it will *almost certainly* not be an issue. However not having it there removes the "almost"...

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.

[StraitR]

There in lies the rub, and this is my issue with using a highly modified AR for HD. Is it easier to shoot than a handgun or shotgun? You bet. Mine being suppressed, is it much quieter/pleasant than an unsuppressed handgun or shotgun? You bet. Would it look absolutely horrific when held up and paraded around a courtroom or pictured on MSM outlets? You freaking bet. Would that ever make a difference? I don't know, but based on some opinions by those with experience in such things, it's a solid maybe, and that becomes an odds vs stakes issue for me.

I really want to use the AR for all those positive attributes, but have moved to a stock Benelli for HD. I'm sure it would look scary to some, but I've left it completely unmodified. I've only added external accessories to include a white light, T-2, velcro cards, and a sling. Don't get me wrong, I would love to add a Ti extended mag tube, but I prefer to leave it stock for it's intended use. I guess I'm banking on the fact that LE agencies tend to add accessories, but don't often make internal modifications or fiddle with functionality, so that's the approach I'm taking.

[critter]

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..."

[Olim9]

While a lot of these things may come up in a trial, I would just have a functional pistol that isn’t prone to “just going off” and being able to articulate every modification on the gun. You’ll get shit for carrying a round in the chamber, almost everyone here is using some sort of aftermarket sight and the people who will be making judgements about you in a courtroom have no fucking idea how violence or at least how firearms work. No way in hell would something a juror may or may not say have any influence on why I have a set of fiber optics on my carry gun. That being said, I am not condoning blood splatter frames, tacky slogans or punisher backplates on a carry gun.

I have Dawsons on my gun since I’ve found that a red fiber optic front works best with my eyes and lets me put bullets where they need to be in a fairly quick manner depending on the distance. I’m not switching to shitty plastic OEM Glock sights or big fat Ameriglos and end up having a whole bunch of hits off target because hey, it came like that from the factory! I have never been in a shooting or in a courtroom but I wager I’ll better deal with having to defend why I have “competition” sights on my gun than have to explain why one of the rounds I fired happened to miss who I intended to shoot. My Glock 19 I currently use for carry is pretty vanilla but everything I have on it makes for being able to place rounds where I need them to be a little bit easier.

I’m very inexperienced to just how to the legal system works but this sort of concern is something I really do not subscribe to.