Modify your CCW pistol?

[Al James]

I was reading another post here and the old topic of modifying your carry pistol came up and it got me thinking about the subject--again.

I have always heeded the warnings from others regarding the liability/legal issues of modifications. Due to that I never carry reloads or mess with the trigger, springs, etc in my dedicated CCW pistols. Ive always figured that I'd rather be safe than sorry if I were to ever have an AD or god forbid that I had to intentionally shoot someone and call the police.

So my question is:

Lets say I put a new connector in my SR or Glock, changed the springs, stone/polished a few surfaces, etc. All minor internal mods that dont scream modified. Fast forward to when I shoot the pistol illegally and have to go to court for it. I understand the weapon would be confiscated as evidence. But, where in the proceedings does someone investigate my pistol? Do they detail strip it? Measure the pull weight? Identify any modifications that arent obvious?

Where does the seemingly slippery slope begin and end? Does a aftermarket +2 mag extension on your G26 constitute a modified/untested by the factory pistol? Does adding more rounds to this pistol prove in court your intent to kill more people? That has has always been the argument thrown around for not using handloads.

This is not a sarcastic post, I am genuinely curious about this. Does anyone have any first hand experience with this or read anything from court cases where relevant? Like I said I have always taken the cautious approach and told others to do the same. I would love some links to actual case law in where a precedent has been set. Thanks and I look forward to your opinions!

 

[revhigh]

I'd say you're a lot safer with ANY mod that is factory supplied, for example the Glock 3.5 and 5 # trigger kits or accesories from Glock. This would keep the 'chain of changes' within the manufacturer of the gun, which would at the very least allow you to subpoena them to testify if needed. All mods were factory supplied and approved ... blah blah blah .... right or wrong it's a litigious society that we live in.

As to how far they'd break your gun down and how closely they'd analyze it ? It probably depends on the righteousness of the shoot, as well as the depth of pockets of the opposing client and the skill of his attorney in firearms cases. I for one prefer to give as little legal ammunition to my opposition as possible ....

Therefore I carry ONLY factory rounds in a completely stock G26 or KT P3AT when I choose to carry.

REV

 

[Mike J]

I don't make modifications to the triggers on any gun I might use for self defense. I don't believe changing grips or sights would be a concern. I hadn't thought about the aftermarket magazine extension until you mentioned it Al. I tend to try to play it safe. I believe the biggest thing is to not lighten the trigger or remove safety devices even though I may consider them completely unnecessary.

 

[revhigh]

I don't make modifications to the triggers on any gun I might use for self defense.

I tend to try to play it safe.

I believe the biggest thing is to not lighten the trigger or remove safety devices even though I may consider them completely unnecessary.

Pretty much my rules for myself as well Mike. Good rules if you ask me.

REV

 

[Al James]

I don't make modifications to the triggers on any gun I might use for self defense. I don't believe changing grips or sights would be a concern. I hadn't thought about the aftermarket magazine extension until you mentioned it Al. I tend to try to play it safe. I believe the biggest thing is to not lighten the trigger or remove safety devices even though I may consider them completely unnecessary.

I hadnt thought of it either! I have changed sights and added grips/extensions to my carry guns and never thought twice. Thats why I'm curious where the legal BS starts and ends in regard to mods. Or should you carry an as bought new, bone stock, pistol and ammo?

 

[Mike J]

I'm not going to make a promise Al because I have kids & they move my stuff around but I am going to try to find my copy of "The Gun Digest Book of Combat Handgunnery 6th Edition" & look back over what Ayoob has to say about all of this.

Edited to correct the book title.

 

[Mike J]

Okay I found it Al (It had fell behind my nightstand) but the only thing I saw addressed in there was trigger pull. If you would like to ask Ayoob he is a member at TheHighRoad though he seldom posts. You could PM him I believe his forum name is his name typed in all caps. Or you could possibly go to his blog at backwoods home magazine & ask there. I don't really think an extended magazine is an issue but there is no telling what a lawyer might try to use against you in court.

 

[Cheesewhiz]

I would imagine that in some parts of the country, like where I live, some lawyers would make you out as a deranged lunatic bent on murder for any of the following:

Trigger job or modification.
Added nightsights.
Extended or large capacity magazines.
Laser or light attachments.
Handloads.
+P ammo.
A quick draw holster.
etc, etc.

Of course if it was an armed intruder in your house, you could probably wound him, urinate on him, drowned him in your toilet and pour gas on him and set him on fire.
Maybe not, but the rules do change when someone attacks you in your home.

...I wonder if you're a homeless man with a travel ready refrigerator box, if that would qualify as a domicile.

 

[NixieTube]

I live in Massachusetts and I'm wary enough of it to be careful about it. I doubt a basic trigger job that smoothed out the trigger could get you in trouble here but removing other parts - particularly safety-related parts - from the gun here could be a very different story.

Like so many other things in Massachusetts where firearms are concerned, there is not a a cut-and-dried answer to this question. I'm going to put some Galloway parts in my SR9 - probably the stainless guide rod, which if anything is a demonstrable improvement, and maybe some trigger parts from Ghost. One thing I **won't do** is remove or modify any of the safety stuff on the gun. I won't even alter the loaded chamber indicator here. The firing pin block, LCI and magazine disconnect safety as well as the external safety and tongue in the trigger are all going to go completely unmodified here as long as I own the gun. I think the rest is up to the owner. Making the pistol function better while not detracting from any of its inherent safety features, I think, would be a hard case to make for "irresponsibility" on anyone's part.

In other jurisdictions, where the laws are simultaneously more clear and less restrictive, I wouldn't even worry about the mag. disconnect.

I will never have a 17 round magazine inside my SR9 in MA, unless and until the laws change, and I'm trying to do that. I might put a light/laser on it - it's designed for that and it was approved for sale here with the rail attachment, so I don't see any problem there. I would pause, however, at modifying any internal part of the gun related to safety features that might have played a part in getting it approved for sale here (and the criteria and minutes of those meetings are murky). If you have any doubts about your local jurisdiction, proceed with caution.

Now, on the other hand, if I used the gun for nothing but competition and never carried it, I might be willing to undertake more extensive modifications. I just never want to get into a situation where some prosecutor says: "This guy who removed his safety features is a menace to society, particularly because he shot the crystal-meth addled good boy victim here dead with his gun that he removed safety features from. That victim was a good meth. addict, troubled to be sure, but an upstanding member of the meth-addict community, and the defendant is the real menace and he deserves to go to prison forever because he didn't run away from the now-dead Eagle Scout meth-addict home invader. Plus he modified the safety features of his gun so that tells you right away what kind of scumbag he really is."

My $0.02 from the Commonwealth. By the way as far as case law is concerned, I have not done the legal research but I suspect most Class A Unrestricted LTC holders in Massachusetts stay well within the law as I do, so there isn't much case law to begin with.

 

[98_1LE]

I have read and rejected the argument for a stock defense gun. The legality of the shot is what matters, not the condition of the gun. And the simple truth is, if I have my gun out of the holster, pointed at someone, and my finger in the trigger guard, we are already past the point where the shot is legal.

From my limited experience, a better and lighter trigger improves my accuracy a lot, and I genuinely do not want to miss in this instance. My lawyer would spin the gun mods to be positive foresight to protect the innocent bystanders in the event I need to use my gun for defense.

 

[NixieTube]

I have read and rejected the argument for a stock defense gun. The legality of the shot is what matters, not the condition of the gun.

That's a very good point, and it's extremely important that people understand the law regarding the use of deadly force. If you'd like to learn about how the law regarding the use of deadly force really is in Massachusetts, google "Langone Carciero Hospital Shooting Massachusetts."

It took almost six months after the incident for Langone to be completely, finally cleared and absolved of any wrongdoing after saving a doctor's life in a HOSPITAL by shooting and killing a knife-wielding psychopath - with a gun he had every credential, right and reason to have on his person. For almost six months after he saved that doctor's life, he was more a potential suspect than a hero here in the Commonwealth.

 

[Cheesewhiz]

I have read and rejected the argument for a stock defense gun. The legality of the shot is what matters, not the condition of the gun. And the simple truth is, if I have my gun out of the holster, pointed at someone, and my finger in the trigger guard, we are already past the point where the shot is legal.

From my limited experience, a better and lighter trigger improves my accuracy a lot, and I genuinely do not want to miss in this instance. My lawyer would spin the gun mods to be positive foresight to protect the innocent bystanders in the event I need to use my gun for defense.

Make sure your lawyer has defended this successfully in a case before. Cops, I mean real friggin' police officers, have lost their jobs and money because they fired a DA revolver in a single action fashion. Their argument was it made the gun more accurate, they lost because it made the shooting premeditated.

 

[ArmedinAZ]

What name comes to mind if you could pick anyone to be on your defense team if you've had to use deadly force? Massad Ayoob right? He is arguably the top expert witness in these cases in the USA. He says do not modify the fire control or safety devices of a carry weapon.

His column in the August 2011 Combat Handguns addresses how things can go terribly wrong in court. The article ends with: One of the great internet gun forum myths is, "All that matters is that it was a clean shoot".

All I need to know. Do what you think is best.

 

[98_1LE]

I have read and rejected the argument for a stock defense gun. The legality of the shot is what matters, not the condition of the gun. And the simple truth is, if I have my gun out of the holster, pointed at someone, and my finger in the trigger guard, we are already past the point where the shot is legal.

From my limited experience, a better and lighter trigger improves my accuracy a lot, and I genuinely do not want to miss in this instance. My lawyer would spin the gun mods to be positive foresight to protect the innocent bystanders in the event I need to use my gun for defense.

Make sure your lawyer has defended this successfully in a case before. Cops, I mean real friggin' police officers, have lost their jobs and money because they fired a DA revolver in a single action fashion. Their argument was it made the gun more accurate, they lost because it made the shooting premeditated.

I moved out of Illinois 20 years ago. The state I live in now, Texas, has this thing called the castle doctrine, that basically means I won't have to explain anything as long as the shot is legitimate.

Ayoob, like most gun writers, make their living stirring up controversy. This is the same crap they have been printing in gun rags for decades. The rules have changed; the rhetoric needs to catch up.

 

[ArmedinAZ]

Ayoob, like most gun writers, make their living stirring up controversy. This is the same crap they have been printing in gun rags for decades. The rules have changed; the rhetoric needs to catch up.

I respectfully disagree. From Wikipedia:

Massad F. Ayoob (born July 20, 1948) is an internationally known firearms and self-defense instructor. He has taught police techniques and civilian self-defense to both law enforcement officers and private citizens in numerous venues since 1974. He was the director of the Lethal Force Institute (LFI) in Concord, New Hampshire from 1981 to 2009, and he now directs the Massad Ayoob Group (MAG).[1] Ayoob has appeared as an expert witness in several trials. He has served as a part-time police officer in New Hampshire since 1972 and holds the rank of Captain in the Grantham, New Hampshire police department.[2]

Ayoob has authored several books and more than 1,000 articles on firearms, combat techniques, self-defense, and legal issues, and has served in an editorial capacity for Guns Magazine, American Handgunner, Gun Week, and Combat Handguns. Since 1995, he has written self-defense- and firearms-related articles for Backwoods Home Magazine. He also has a featured segment on the television show Personal Defense TV, which airs on the Sportsman Channel in the United States.

While Ayoob has been in the courtroom as a testifying police officer, expert witness, and police prosecutor, he is not an attorney; he is, however, a former Vice Chairman of the Forensic Evidence Committee of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL), and is believed to be the only non-attorney ever to hold this position.[3][4] His published work was cited by the Violence Policy Center in their amicus curiae brief filed with the U.S. Supreme Court in the District of Columbia v. Heller case, and he himself filed a declaration in another amicus brief in this case.[5] His course for attorneys, titled "The Management of the Lethal Force/Deadly Weapons Case", was, according to Jeffrey Weiner (former president of NACDL), "the best course for everything you need to know but are never taught in law school."[4]

Ayoob remains an internationally prominent law enforcement officer training instructor. Since 1987, he has served as chairman of the Firearms Committee of the American Society of Law Enforcement Trainers (ASLET).[dated info] He also serves on the Advisory Board of the International Law Enforcement Educators’ and Trainers’ Association, and is an instructor at the National Law Enforcement Training Center.[5

Mr. Ayoob is not your average gun scribbler trying to convince you and me to buy every gun that passes through his hands.

I do agree with you the rules have changes...for the worse.

 

[98_1LE]

Impressive resume no doubt. I have only been familiar with him since 1995 or so, from reading gun magazines.

So what is the argument for an unmodified gun, as in when exactly would this come into the equation? I understand it in the pre-castle doctrine days and sitting in civil court, but as long as it is a good shot, I won't be there.

Are you implying the grand jury would consider this in deciding to bill or no-bill the shot?

And BTW I am not talking about home smithing, although it should not matter, I am talking about pistols sent to a qualified gun smith (Ken Crawley and Bob L from Brazos Custom).

 

[Boge]

A good defense lawyer will shoot that modified gun BS down in a heartbeat. :roll: That is of course taking into account that you do not have Punisher logo grips emblazoned with Waffen SS runes on your .50 cal. Desert Eagle and are a card carrying Aryan Brotherhood member. :lol: :wink:

 

[P90]

I don't carry my CCW with the intentions of ever having to shoot someone with it. I've used it for animal control and protection, and that is what I carry it for. If it becomes necessary for me to shoot someone with it, it will be strictly in a, have to, self-defense situation, and I don't worry about any kind of Modifications. If it saves me, or my families life, any modification it has, is well worth it.

 

[ArmedinAZ]

This one always ends up at the same place fellas.

The answer to the original question is nobody (here) knows. It's all guessing.

 

[revhigh]

Ayoob, like most gun writers, make their living stirring up controversy. This is the same crap they have been printing in gun rags for decades. The rules have changed; the rhetoric needs to catch up.

LOL !! I'm sure that SOME day .... Mas hopes to know as much as you do about firearms law, and our court system. I'm sure you have more experience than Ayoob, and you surely know more than him, having probably read a brief article in your local paper that a castle doctrine law was passed in your state.

I'm sure Mas has never heard of the castle doctrine .... He oughta come into the 21st century. :roll:


REV

 

[revhigh]

So what is the argument for an unmodified gun, as in when exactly would this come into the equation?

You tell us .... you're the castle doctrine expert .... Mas Ayoob is just a gun writer stirring up internet rumors ....

Read the book ... In The Gravest Extreme ... and then come back and tell us that you still agree with your stance here ....


REV

 

[revhigh]

I don't worry about any kind of Modifications. If it saves me, or my families life, any modification it has, is well worth it.

Easy words to write .... the consequences may not be as easy to live with .... especially when they could have been easily avoided ....

REV

 

[98_1LE]

I do not believe it is an issue and am comfortable carrying a pistol that has had action tuning.

I suppose I shouldn't go to the range anymore either, since practice could be construed as premeditation....

 

[revhigh]

I do not believe it is an issue and am comfortable carrying a pistol that has had action tuning.

I suppose I shouldn't go to the range anymore either, since practice could be construed as premeditation....

Sounds like a well thought-out and reasoned conclusion.


REV

 

[lakers3234]

Question Rev: What happens if you modify the trigger but the gun is just for home and one lives by themselves? I mean modifying the trigger wouldn't matter in that case since it's just you in the home and no other family members.

 

[revhigh]

Question Rev: What happens if you modify the trigger but the gun is just for home and one lives by themselves? I mean modifying the trigger wouldn't matter in that case since it's just you in the home and no other family members.

Nothing will ever happen due to a modified gun .... as long as it never is used in a shooting or accident. I have several modified 1911's, that I use at the range only. Guns with very light triggers ... target guns. If there were ever an AD at the range and someone was hurt ... that would be a very bad thing.

I'm not a lawyer ... if you want definitive legal advice ... consult a lawyer well-versed in firearms law. You can always start by reading the book mentioned. This is a very serious issue, and people approach it with such a cavalier attitude, spouting complete BS, totally unfounded beliefs, with a total lack of knowledge based in reality. People are very quick to write macho things like ... If I have to use my gun in self defense ... let the chips fall where they may .... but the truth is ... if anything DOES happen ... they very well may not like where the chips fall ... all because of a lack of knowledge based on beliefs that they had .... that had no basis in fact.

Carrying a gun is VERY serious business, and a lot of prople approach it in a manner that is far less than responsible. No training, no knowledge, no real experience. They go buy a Ruger SR9 or any other gun, get their CCW, and then go around bragging about how they're 'carrying'. Nobody ever knows if I'm carrying or not ... I never talk about it, and don't want ANYBODY to know about it. Truth is ... I probably carry about 10% of the time ... if that ... it's a pain in the a$$ to carry a gun ... even a 12 oz P3AT in your pocket.

Please guys .... read the book .... what do you have to lose ?


REV

 

[ArmedinAZ]

lakers, the thinking about modded weapons if for any self defense application, not just a pistol you carry in public.

I was fortunate to take my CCW class and spent another day of instruction at Gunsite. They hammered pretty hard that the preparations you make RIGHT NOW before a shooting has happened is of utmost importance. What will you say, what will you do, do you have a lawyer on call who you know will defend you properly? It's easy to say a good defense lawyer will shred any silly argument...well if you're carrying do you have that good defense lawyer lined up? Wouldn't it suck to end up actually spending time behind bars and/or spend or lose all of your assets because your post-shooting readiness is poor?

 

[revhigh]

Wouldn't it suck to end up actually spending time behind bars and/or spend or lose all of your assets because your post-shooting readiness is poor?

Nah ... why worry about all that silly legal stuff ... let the chips fall where they may .....

Incidentally .... all the things that AIA mentions in his excellent post are covered in detail in the book mentioned ...


REV

 

[Mike J]

Depending on who is doing the investigating & what political agenda the prosecutors office has there is not telling what they might try. Here is a link to what to me is a scary story about a man that used a firearm to defend himself & his family. It took 2 years for him to get clear of the legal issues & he was an instructor using an unmodified gun. http://www.armedcitizensnetwork.org/images/stories/Hickey%20Booklet.pdf

I had posted that link in a thread in concealed carry central because I think we need to be aware of what we might be up against. The truth is a trial lawyer will do anything in his power to win. They are not concerned so much with right or wrong as they are trying to win their case. I just don't want to give them ammunition. The other thing is that if you ever have a negligent discharge situation with a modified gun you will be screwed. I know all of us here are always safe & never do anything dumb but all it takes is a split second of carelessness for our whole world to be turned upside down.


ArmedInAZ is right though. For the most part these threads end up with us just having to agree to disagree. I am fine with that but I do believe we should think about our choices.

 

[revhigh]

The truth is a trial lawyer will do anything in his power to win.

That's exactly right Mike, the only thing worse than some scum attorney (not that ALL attorneys are scum), is a politician. Both will lie, make stuff up, fabricate data, and do and say anything to make it seem like the law-abiding shooter was the deranged gun nut with a self-modified and unsafe gun, and his client was a good boy on his way to church when you needlessly gunned him down. Forget the fact that he had a knife, was trying to stab your daughter, and had a rap sheet 5 pages long ... he was just mis-understood ... maybe abused by his parents 10 years ago or so.

Truth and common sense don't matter in these cases ... PERCEPTION matters ..... and to make matters worse .... the only people who they need to convince are the 13 on the jury ... they're the ONLY people who's PERCEPTION matters. There won't be 13 NRA members or any gun store owners or employees on the jury. There'll be the most liberal, gun hating people that the opposing lawyer can possibly find.

REV[/i]