PDA

View Full Version : mod'ing a duty weapon


Jamez
07-16-2008, 3:50 PM
Something i was just thinking about:

I'm an armed guard with a glock 22. I just recently started shooting competition with my glock (obviously in the Production group) if I added something as simple as aftermarket springs to reduce recoil (like a Sprinco recoil reducer) and IF IF IF i ever had to use my duty weapon and put someone down, would those mod's negatively affect me in court since I modified my weapon?

badicedog
07-16-2008, 4:13 PM
I think you just answered your own question. Anything other than factory stock, you are asking for a lawsuit or legal trouble. This includes home defense

AK4me
07-16-2008, 4:16 PM
I think you just answered your own question. Anything other than factory stock, you are asking for a lawsuit or legal trouble. This includes home defense

Why would it matter??

Splinter
07-16-2008, 4:20 PM
Why would it matter??

Because we live in california....

sigsauer887
07-16-2008, 4:22 PM
Why would it matter??


Massad Ayoob has lots of court case scenarios on reasons not to modify a duty or HD gun. A DA will twist and turn everything to make you look like a killer. A modified gun is more lethal in the DA's eyes. Be safe.

AK4me
07-16-2008, 4:24 PM
Massad Ayoob has lots of court case scenarios on reasons not to modify a duty or HD gun. A DA will twist and turn everything to make you look like a killer. A modified gun is more lethal in the DA's eyes. Be safe.

Does that only apply to LEO or what?

gunn
07-16-2008, 4:28 PM
I believe the concern is that a modified duty weapon may be used by the opposing lawyer (perhaps in a civil suit) to make you (the law abiding defender) out as a "crazed gunslinger just itchin' to shoot somebody."

Your security company may have a policy against such a modification. In the event of a shooting, I'm sure the last thing you want to have happen is to be cut loose by the security company and left to fund your own legal defense. Even if you are some kind of highly trained executive protection close combat specialist, that can't be cheap. The corporation will cover its own *** with lawyers and insurance, but what about yours?

Haven't you seen the stories about people working for convenience stores or pizza delivery companies being accosted by some worthless scum. They defend themselves (or customers in the stores) with a gun (or their bare hands) and are then terminated because it was against company policy to fight/bring a weapon/etc in the workplace? I can understand Pizza Hut's desire to insulate themselves from liability (even if I don't like it) but it doesn't help if you are the piece of bacon being sliced off the rump.

-g


-g

sigsauer887
07-16-2008, 4:29 PM
Does that only apply to LEO or what?

EVERYONE. A peace officer was tried just because his duty revolver was called "python" and the previous owner had modified the trigger. Just stick with the original factory work

CHS
07-16-2008, 4:40 PM
This is part of the reason to collect more guns :)

Keep your duty weapon box-stock, and build the race gun of your dreams for competition!

DesertGunner
07-16-2008, 6:36 PM
Does that only apply to LEO or what?

No, if you end up in court, you can rest assured that any "bubba-izing" or tacti-cool accessories will be used to paint you as a bloodthirsty psycho who finally achieved his lifelong wish of killing someone.

DesertGunner
07-16-2008, 6:37 PM
Because we live in california....

This really has nothing to do with CA. Modding a duty weapon is going to have the same legal ramification no matter where you live. Like it or not, its how our system works.

Splinter
07-16-2008, 6:44 PM
Being in california, duty weapon or not, makes everything more difficult.

dfletcher
07-16-2008, 6:46 PM
I'm just supposing, would like to know if I'm way off or on, but .....

If you modified your duty (security) weapon and subsequently used it in a shooting situation, there'd be a strong temptation to put much distance between the company and you. Not only could you be fired, the employer might assert you violated company policy and not only let you go, but might be inclined to not pay for your defense. Now the company may have to defend you to defend their own interest, but after all is said & done (if you're acquited) the company might go after you personally to recoup their costs.

Salty
07-16-2008, 6:49 PM
This really has nothing to do with CA. Modding a duty weapon is going to have the same legal ramification no matter where you live. Like it or not, its how our system works.

It's not the "system", it's the people running it. The system assumes that a handgun is a handgun and self defense is self defense.

DesertGunner
07-16-2008, 8:27 PM
It's not the "system", it's the people running it. The system assumes that a handgun is a handgun and self defense is self defense.

However you prefer to look at it. I like to deal in reality.

1911su16b870
07-16-2008, 9:55 PM
IMO leave your duty firearm stock. If you polish some of the surfaces that will normally be polished by use, so they look the same as those on old duty firearms, you're probably ok.

leelaw
07-16-2008, 10:00 PM
Leave it bone stock. I've been told that stuff for Sigs, like Gray's Guns' "Reliability Package" are to be refrained from.

If you're modifying it from stock, it'd better be to make it harder to shoot - ie, install a "NY Trigger" on a Glock.

tunder
07-17-2008, 1:23 AM
Yep, lots of scenarios and lots of what ifs.
The idea is that these are points that can be raised.
Why give them a reason to make you the test case?

And the same goes for using reloads.

SJgunguy24
07-17-2008, 1:35 AM
I went through a CCW class in 05' and I swapped out the 3.5 trigger bar in my G17 and reinstalled the stock part just for that very reason. I put the G17 and G26 on the app. The G26 is bone stock, execpt for the Trijicons N/S....... Got denied :( Also the big no no is HAND LOADS. If your using a handgun for protection,ANYWHERE WHAT SO EVER make sure you load up what ever the local L.E.O.'s use. If you have to shoot someone and you used a "home brew" round. Any lawyer will sell that to a jury "Hand loaded DEADLY AMMO FOR THE SPECIFIC REASON OF KILLING" That kinda looks bad.
Carry the same ammo the cops do "I used the same ammo that my local LEO uses to minimize the threat of over penetration" I think that sounds better. God forbid the prosocuter finds out that you have done anything to your gun besides field stripping and cleaning.

Matt P
07-17-2008, 2:02 AM
My attitude falls well with Stage 2s opinion.
I have modified the trigger in my 5.7, which also is my CCW gun.
I feel confidently if the issue of the mod I preformed even came to light, I would have little trouble in defending it as an enhancement to allow me to shoot much more responsibly.
Its because I am concerned for others, and their welfare, that I wanted to insure I carried a firearm that gives me the highest degree of accuracy. A proper trigger is the most important step in that process in my opinion.
As for the duty weapon, it would more be what your agency/job allows for modifications, if any.
If none are stated, my attitude is to go with what allows you to shoot the most accurately.
Having been a former Rangemaster, I personally knew of no policy that covered off duty weapons and modifications.
With agencies that issued weapons as mine did. I had no issue with putting 3.5 connectors in some of the Glocks to help some of the shooters who maintained safe firearm management, but struggled with accuracy. My Chief was aware of me doing this.

If there was serious stigma over weapon modifications, then why put reddots on rifles? Why put lights on guns?
Is it really that far of a reach to then look at work preformed on the weapon itself to enhance accuracy?

All this is contingent on safe weapon handling and finger off the trigger until you have made that choice to shoot.

All the above just my opinion.

STAGE 2
07-17-2008, 12:55 PM
Also the big no no is HAND LOADS. If your using a handgun for protection,ANYWHERE WHAT SO EVER make sure you load up what ever the local L.E.O.'s use. If you have to shoot someone and you used a "home brew" round. Any lawyer will sell that to a jury "Hand loaded DEADLY AMMO FOR THE SPECIFIC REASON OF KILLING" That kinda looks bad.


There are plenty of benign reasons for using handloads, and again, if you intentionally shot, that moots the issue of "being deadly". The law allows you to be deadly in certian situations. Plus, as was mentioned before, they type of ammo doesn't go to any element of any crime. Thats why there hasn't been a case in which someone was convicted of a good shoot because they used handloads.


Carry the same ammo the cops do "I used the same ammo that my local LEO uses to minimize the threat of over penetration" I think that sounds better. God forbid the prosocuter finds out that you have done anything to your gun besides field stripping and cleaning.

That is by no means a safe route. I've personally seen attorneys go after the fact that the defendant used 'evil' hollow point ammo designed to expand and "shred human flesh" and cause more damage than regular bullets.

Again, any attorney can bring up anything they like. However the question is whether or not it is successful. As of right now the proponents of these ideas don't have a single case to point to and thats because these arguments are not legal winners.

All they do is scare gun owners and sell magazines.

cheese
07-17-2008, 1:59 PM
If all you had was a trigger job done how are they going to know? If it was a good shot i would think it wouldn't matter but i am no lawyer.

-hanko
07-17-2008, 5:10 PM
Massad Ayoob has lots of court case scenarios on reasons not to modify a duty or HD gun. A DA will twist and turn everything to make you look like a killer. A modified gun is more lethal in the DA's eyes. Be safe.
It would be most interesting if you could cite a few (or maybe even just one):rolleyes:

I've taken LFI I and II from Mr. Ayoob. In both classes he claimed, just as you did, "...A DA will twist and turn everything to make you look like a killer. A modified gun is more lethal in the DA's eyes." When asked, he advised he would make precedent(s) available, but it never happened.

We need to either cite an actual case where the actor was found guilty or liable because he used reloaded ammo and/or a modified weapon, OR we need to stop posting this crap.

Give us a case;)

-hanko

homerm14
07-17-2008, 7:53 PM
The only mods my dept will allow is grips, and they have to be installed by the range staff. I suggest keeping the gun bone stock, and if that does'nt work find a gun that does. The only thing I have done to my duty gun (sig 226) is change the grips and put grip tape on the front strap.

mecam
07-17-2008, 8:12 PM
Sights can changed but must be dept. approved.

homerm14
07-17-2008, 8:17 PM
Sights can changed but must be dept. approved.

Ours are issued with night sights.

Max-the-Silent
07-18-2008, 8:43 AM
My .02.

I've read Ayoob's writings on the subject, but in all my time in the PD and elsewhere I've never encountered a situation that developed into a criminal or civil liability issue that involved a "modified" firearm, other than a un-registered SBS or SBR.

Simple answer to your question - modify your Glock 22 in non-permanent fashion, switch back to stock parts for duty use.

Other posters have mentioned handloads, good advice. OK for practice, never for duty.