PDA

View Full Version : CCW with a lightened Glock trigger?


vinson
03-26-2011, 9:19 PM
I initially installed a 3.5 pound connector on my G23 like so many others to improve accuracy on the range. However, now I am carrying the G23 as a CCW. Is there legal precident that will incriminate me if I use the weapon to defend myself? Should I convert it back to the stock trigger?

Cokebottle
03-26-2011, 9:30 PM
Check with your issuing authority. THEY may have a problem with it.
Some do not allow any accessories at all including lasers, lights, and night sights.
Some only allow factory options (such as CT grips offered on many guns).
Some don't care about accessories, but specify a minimum trigger pull.

No legal precedent that I am aware of... but be aware that the plaintiff's attorney in the follow-up civil case will most likely make it an issue.

mdimeo
03-26-2011, 10:39 PM
I would humbly submit that 3.5# is way too light for a carry handgun without a manual safety. Assuming you have perfect trigger discipline, you still need to worry about other stuff getting into the trigger guard; there was recently a thread about a holster snag leading to "glock leg", and I've read about (well-documented) incidents with shirt buttons, belt loops, and jacket drawstring toggle thingies leading to NDs.

I'd worry more about shooting yourself in the backside than legal issues :). Put the original trigger back in.

nicki
03-27-2011, 12:01 AM
Ex NY Giant football player who shot himself while adjusting his Glock in sweatpants.

Worst part he was in NYC without a CCW permit. He was lucky medically, not so legally, he should be getting out of prison shortly.

Well, at least you got a permit.

Nicki

Turo
03-27-2011, 12:26 AM
Ex NY Giant football player who shot himself while adjusting his Glock in sweatpants.

He had a Glock tucked into his sweatpants with no holster and then pulled the trigger trying to grab it when it fell down. He was an idiot. Any holster worth the money paid for it is going to cover the trigger guard.


I would humbly submit that 3.5# is way too light for a carry handgun without a manual safety. Assuming you have perfect trigger discipline, you still need to worry about other stuff getting into the trigger guard; there was recently a thread about a holster snag leading to "glock leg", and I've read about (well-documented) incidents with shirt buttons, belt loops, and jacket drawstring toggle thingies leading to NDs.

I'd worry more about shooting yourself in the backside than legal issues :). Put the original trigger back in.
Again, any holster that a Glock should be worn with will cover the trigger guard.

I'm sure the OP is going to use a holster. There's no legal reason not to use a lighter trigger, especially if the OP shoots better with it. I say keep the gun the way you shoot it best and don't worry about it, unless your issuing authority frowns on it.

Congrats on the CCW, and remember the important part is that you are carrying.

thefinger
03-27-2011, 12:57 AM
http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1259716

marcusrn
03-27-2011, 2:55 AM
Your local gun check at agency of issue may pass the weapon as good to go but if you ever get in a shooting your opponents council will cause all kinds of havoc. Always carry same as law enforcement. No need to go crazy like NYC 12 pound connector. Most agencies carry standard 5 lb pull. You won't know the difference in a gunfight and may save you from a negligent d/c. IMHO I have 2 Glocks on my CCW and a DA sp101.

Zhukov
03-27-2011, 3:05 AM
Marc - Got any court cases to back up your assertion that people would somehow be liable or have any issues in court due to the trigger?

Glock22Fan
03-27-2011, 8:49 AM
Marc - Got any court cases to back up your assertion that people would somehow be liable or have any issues in court due to the trigger?

I face-palm when people say things like this: have you got any court cases that say that it isn't a problem? Absence of proof does not mean that it can't happen. We know well enough from many of the recent court cases that the way the judge and prosecution argue doesn't necessarily make sense to us.

RangemasterP226
03-27-2011, 8:55 AM
I would not carry a light trigger on a CCW gun. WHY? No one here can really answer your question anyway because the only real answer is the one the jury would give you if something bad happened.
Put in the original trigger.

vinson
03-27-2011, 9:09 AM
Just thinking that my lightened Glock trigger is probably close to the same pull weight for a lot of 1911 CCWs out there when it comes to defending trigger pull wt in court. Not worried about accidental firing as the gun will be in kydex holster with trigger guard. Finger will never be on trigger unless I intend to fire.

12voltguy
03-27-2011, 9:35 AM
I would not carry a light trigger on a CCW gun. WHY? No one here can really answer your question anyway because the only real answer is the one the jury would give you if something bad happened.
Put in the original trigger.

better not have any man stopper bullets in there either, maybe tips with nerf tips on them, don't want that jury upset..

tyrist
03-27-2011, 9:37 AM
It's a bad idea. Remember if there is a mechanical failure on the part of the machine the manufacturer will not cover there product if you have altered it. The glock trigger is more than light enough for any self defense shooting.

stix213
03-27-2011, 9:52 AM
Lightened trigger pull resulting in the criminal's attorney taking you to the cleaners is one of the longer running forum myths. You won't be the first person to have lightened the trigger on your glock. Unless someone can point to an actual instance of this being an issue, I call bs. Especially if u believe it to increase accuracy, as you are responsible for every round you fire.

PressCheck
03-27-2011, 10:42 AM
I've been carrying Glocks wirh 3.5 lb connectors for Many Years - No problems here!

Maestro Pistolero
03-27-2011, 10:51 AM
Marc - Got any court cases to back up your assertion that people would somehow be liable or have any issues in court due to the trigger?

You won't find any that stuck. IMHO, there is considerable internet FUD over this issue.

That said, if you have a 3.5 lb. trigger and get in a shooting and claim that the gun just "went off" or that it was accidental, you are screwed, and you should be.

For every "expert" that claims a lightened trigger is more dangerous there are two experts to say that a somewhat lightened trigger results in more accurate fire . . . TO A POINT.

I would agree that 3.5 lbs. is a bit light for a carry gun. 4.5 to 5 lbs. seems ideal, and anything under 4 lbs is usually considered a little risky for carry.

My two cents.

rrr70
03-27-2011, 11:07 AM
I actually prefer NY1 triggers on my carry GLOCKs. I like this trigger pull more.
YMMV

Turo
03-27-2011, 11:24 AM
I would agree that 3.5 lbs. is a bit light for a carry gun. 4.5 to 5 lbs. seems ideal, and anything under 4 lbs is usually considered a little risky for carry.

From what I understand, using a 3.5# connector on a Glock with a standard 5.5# trigger will bring the actual pull weight down to about 4.5# depending on how you measure it.

So he's not using a glock with a 3.5# trigger, more like 4.5# or 4#.

Maestro Pistolero
03-27-2011, 11:33 AM
From what I understand, using a 3.5# connector on a Glock with a standard 5.5# trigger will bring the actual pull weight down to about 4.5# depending on how you measure it.

So he's not using a glock with a 3.5# trigger, more like 4.5# or 4#.

Sounds perfect.

My "Glock" is an XD45 Compact with a 4.5 carry trigger from Rich D. at Canyon Creek. It has about 1/8" take-up, 1/8" over-travel and about 3/16 reset. Suits me perfectly.

vinson
03-27-2011, 12:34 PM
"thefinger" thank you for that most excellent script. Here is one the quotes from it It is a response from someone writing that one shouldn't change a stock setup because Glock knows best and how could a person think they know better than Glock. "A lot of departments change the stock set up so they must know better than Glock. Glocks don't come on the consumer shelf with NY1 or NY2 triggers in them, yet various police departments install them, or require them to be installed, so obviously they know better than Glock. Glock sells weapons with a 3.5# connector so obviously that is a safe set up. Would Glock sell an unsafe set up?

People carry "custom 1911" pistols with 3.5 pound trigger pulls. The actual pull weight is 3.5#, considerably lower than the pull weight of a Glock with a 3.5# connector installed. And those guns are single action. "The defendant was carrying a weapon 'cocked and locked'. He must have been on the prowl for blood. He is so blood thirsty that he had Ed Brown make him a customized killing weapon." You get the point. I'm just pointing out that anything can be construed to make you look like an evil gremlin."

Also, every time I call Glock and ask them what their policy on trigger connectors is, as in what type of connector should go with what activity, they always tell me that they have no policy and give no recommendation.

They sell NY1, NY2, 3.5# connector, 5.5# connector, and an 8# connector. Many agencies customize their weapon. All I'm saying is Glock gives you a lot of after market, or customized order ability."

vinson
03-27-2011, 3:27 PM
Alright then, I read the extensive script as provided by "thefinger" and just changed back to the stock connector for my carry Glock.

IrishPirate
03-27-2011, 3:32 PM
if you're worried enough to start a thread....might as well change it.

HondaMasterTech
03-27-2011, 4:20 PM
What's wrong with the Glock factory trigger?

Zhukov
03-27-2011, 4:46 PM
While I carry with everything factory on my FNP-40, I don't advocate for or against a lighter pull.

I was just curious if anyone can list a case where anyone had gotten in trouble or sued and it was brought up.

It wasn't arguing with anyone as it purely was a curiosity thing.

I could see that in the case of a ND, someone could try to argue the point.

But again, I see a lot of folks always screaming "THE SKY IS FALLING" repeatedly because they heard it from someone over there, next door, who heard it on a forum on the internet by an expert named Paul Helmke. ;)

Cokebottle
03-27-2011, 4:55 PM
if you're worried enough to start a thread....might as well change it.
This.

Some things fall under the category of "If you have to ask, you shouldn't do it"

Uriah02
03-27-2011, 5:08 PM
I would not carry a light trigger on a CCW gun. WHY? No one here can really answer your question anyway because the only real answer is the one the jury would give you if something bad happened.
Put in the original trigger.

I plan on having a light trigger on my CCW weapon. Why? Because I shoot it more accurately and I practice proper trigger control.

I know Placer county only allows stock features with NO modifications whatsoever. Sacramento county allows whatever you want. What county are you in?

nick
03-27-2011, 5:09 PM
I think, this would cause an issue if you claim that you didn't mean to shoot the attacker, in which case you're basically claiming a negligent discharge, and lightening your trigger pull sure has contributed.

If you intended to shoot the attacker, then it doesn't matter.

Also, Glock sells a factory 3.5# connector (I believe, it's called 4- now, denoting that it's really about 4-4.5#), and Glocks 34 and 35 come with it. I have it in all my Glocks because I shoot better with it.

paul0660
03-27-2011, 5:14 PM
Just thinking that my lightened Glock trigger is probably close to the same pull weight for a lot of 1911 CCWs out there when it comes to defending trigger pull wt in court. Not worried about accidental firing as the gun will be in kydex holster with trigger guard. Finger will never be on trigger unless I intend to fire.

Good in theory. Run some adrenaline in a low light situation and see what happens.

Personally, "if it ain't DA, it ain't ok", but that is just me. It is true a LOT of LEOs carry Glocks, but somehow they don't get in as much trouble as civilians for ND's, etc. It was not too long ago that Glock's manual recommended against carrying with one chambered, unless the owner was a LEO............for whatever reason.

wash
03-27-2011, 5:26 PM
I was going to say the 3.5 Glock is a lot heavier than 3.5 lbs and still a long pull with the dual trigger safety thing.

I wouldn't worry about carrying one as long as it functions reliably, isn't tuned to the edge and you use a proper holster.

I would worry that the "hair trigger" might get me in a civil suit but that's only after it's successfully defended myself from great bodily harm.

At that point, even if you lose in court, you still won.

If I ever get a CCW license for my Glock, I'll leave in the 3.5 trigger because it's functional, reliable and safe. If I had any doubts about those three things I would put the really heavy, long and creepy trigger back in.

fiddletown
03-28-2011, 8:27 AM
Just thinking that my lightened Glock trigger is probably close to the same pull weight for a lot of 1911 CCWs out there when it comes to defending trigger pull wt in court.....My 1911s are all set at about 4.5 to 5 pounds, and I know at least one police armorer/instructor who could testify as an expert witness that 4.5 to 5 pounds on a 1911 is appropriate for carry.

In any case, some of the possible issue --

[1] Having lightened the trigger, a prosecutor can vilify you as reckless and trigger happy. That will no sit well with a jury of folks who know nothing about, and aren't interested in, guns. The prosecutor will no doubt be able to put on a police armorer who will testify as an expert witness that installing a 3.5 connector in a Glock to be carried for self defense is reckless.

[2] You might claim that you acted intentionally in self defense, but the prosecutor could point to the lightened trigger and perhaps convince a jury that you actually fired the gun accidentally. That might get you convicted of involuntary manslaughter.

[3] Messing around with your carry gun might not hurt you in court, but it sure won't help you any. And it really won't help you on the street. If you can't manage a stock Glock in a real life encounter, it's you and not the gun (get some serious training and practice).

...Not worried about accidental firing .... Finger will never be on trigger unless I intend to fire. Really? How sure are you? How good is your trigger finger discipline under extreme stress? Do you compete in IDPA/IPSC? How much serious training have you had? (And indeed how much training have all those folks had you are recommending sticking with the light trigger?)

Do as you wish. It won't be my problem.

1911su16b870
03-28-2011, 9:25 AM
I initially installed a 3.5 pound connector on my G23 like so many others to improve accuracy on the range. However, now I am carrying the G23 as a CCW. Is there legal precident that will incriminate me if I use the weapon to defend myself? Should I convert it back to the stock trigger?

Changing out connectors is a factory armorer function...obviously surviving a lethal encounter with what ever you have is first priority, but the legal battle will be the second thing you have to survive.

I could envision counsel asking if you are a certified Glock armorer and qualified to install a 3.5 connector? If that answer is yes, ok...but if it is no...it may incriminate your character in the proceedings.

IMO a well used OEM Glock trigger system will self burnish/polish and is quite nice to use, hence no need for a 3.5 pound connector.

stix213
03-28-2011, 9:28 AM
My 1911s are all set at about 4.5 to 5 pounds, and I know at least one police armorer/instructor who could testify as an expert witness that 4.5 to 5 pounds on a 1911 is appropriate for carry.

In any case, some of the possible issue --

[1] Having lightened the trigger, a prosecutor can vilify you as reckless and trigger happy. That will no sit well with a jury of folks who know nothing about, and aren't interested in, guns. The prosecutor will no doubt be able to put on a police armorer who will testify as an expert witness that installing a 3.5 connector in a Glock to be carried for self defense is reckless.

[2] You might claim that you acted intentionally in self defense, but the prosecutor could point to the lightened trigger and perhaps convince a jury that you actually fired the gun accidentally. That might get you convicted of involuntary manslaughter.



Yet with the thousands and thousands of 3.5# connectors sold, has any of this ever happened even 1 time? I'm pretty sure the answer is a big fat NO.

I'm not saying its a good idea to lighten your trigger on your CCW Glock, but I am saying that a prosecutor getting one over on you because you lightened your trigger is nothing but FUD absent any instance of it ever happening before. Its irresponsible to perpetuate FUD. If you still think that lightening your trigger is going to get you in trouble with the prosecutor, please point to a single instance where this became an actual factor. I'm pretty sure you can't, and just rely on unsubstantiated opinion.

The fact is you are far more likely to be shot by police for having your CCW Glock (cause that actually has happened), than get in trouble for lightening your Glock's trigger. If you're concerned about things that unlikely to happen then you probably should just leave your gun at home.

fiddletown
03-28-2011, 10:14 AM
Yet with the thousands and thousands of 3.5# connectors sold, has any of this ever happened even 1 time? I'm pretty sure the answer is a big fat NO....You're assuming that the reason there have been no cases involving the use of Glock with a 3.5 pound disconnector in self defense is because the its use is legally innocuous. But there's another possibility: Glocks with a 3.5 pound disconnector just aren't often actually used (as opposed to simply carried or kept) for self defense.

Relying on historical research is helpful only if there's sufficient historical data. If the question is something like, "Is a private citizen who shoots someone and claims self defense more likely to be charged if he used a Glock with a 3.5 pound disconnector?", or "Is a private citizen who shoots someone and claims self defense more likely to be convicted at trial if he used a Glock with a 3.5 pound disconnector?", the availability of useful data depends on (1) a large enough population of private citizens having shot someone in claimed self defense; (2) a large enough subset of those people charged and tried for their use of a gun in self defense; and (3) a large enough subset of those private citizens having used a Glock with a 3.5 pound disconnector. I suggest that the vast majority of people who keep guns for self defense aren't enthusiasts and use stock guns and commercial ammunition.

...I am saying that a prosecutor getting one over on you because you lightened your trigger is nothing but FUD absent any instance of it ever happening before. Its irresponsible to perpetuate FUD. If you still think that lightening your trigger is going to get you in trouble with the prosecutor, please point to a single instance where this became an actual factor. I'm pretty sure you can't, and just rely on unsubstantiated opinion....Just because there is insufficient historical data doesn't mean that professionals can't make reasoned estimates about how likely a particular result might be under certain circumstance. Indeed, it often happens in the practice of law that a particular issue of interest has not previously been addressed by an appellate court, and one must make a reasoned judgment without the guidance of on point precedent.

Things that go on in trials don't routinely hit the legal publications. In general, only decisions of an appellate court get published. So it would be very unlikely to see a case in which an issue with a lightened trigger showed up in published reports of appellate courts. There are very few cases of self defense in which a gun is actually fired; and only a few of those involved a modified gun; and only a few of those wind up in trial; and only a portion of those go up on appeal.

However, we have reasons to believe that things like ammunition or type of gun used can have an effect on the way members of a jury will view matters and therefore on whether, or how, they can be convinced. For example:

From post verdict interviews of some of the jurors who convicted Harold Fish in Arizona, we know that the ammunition Fish used played a part in the jury verdict. (Fish did win his appeal, a new trial ordered, and the DA chose instead to dismiss the charges.)
Jury simulation studies as describe in this article (http://www.thejuryexpert.com/2009/09/will-it-hurt-me-in-court-weapons-issues-and-the-fears-of-the-legally-armed-citizen/) suggest that the type of gun used can also affect the perceptions of a jury. (The author, Dr. Glenn Meyer, is a moderator at The Firing Line.)
I have personal knowledge, based on my participation in post verdict interviews of jurors, of how various things can affect how a juror views and evaluates evidence.

As Nassim Nicholas Taleb points out repeatedly in his books Fooled by Randomness, the Hidden Role of Chance (Random House, 2004) and The Black Swan, the Impact of the Highly Improbable (Random House, 2007), "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." Taleb, a securities trader and professor at the University of Massachusetts, provides some interesting and useful insights into strategies for dealing with rare events.

joefreas
03-28-2011, 10:23 AM
I initially installed a 3.5 pound connector on my G23 like so many others to improve accuracy on the range. However, now I am carrying the G23 as a CCW. Is there legal precident that will incriminate me if I use the weapon to defend myself? Should I convert it back to the stock trigger?

Might end up with some "Glock leg".
91789

fiddletown
03-28-2011, 11:39 AM
... If you're concerned about things that unlikely to happen then you probably should just leave your gun at home.I just focused on this statement, and it's so silly it can't go unanswered. The point of having a gun at all is to be able to deal with an event that is extremely unlikely to occur. The vast majority of private citizens in this country will life their entire life without ever having to use force in self defense. The vast majority of private citizens who have guns will never have to use those guns in self defense.

So if we were going to only bother preparing for things that were likely to happen, none of us would have guns for self defense.

stix213
03-28-2011, 11:44 AM
I just focused on this statement, and it's so silly it can't go unanswered. The point of having a gun at all is to be able to deal with an event that is extremely unlikely to occur. The vast majority of private citizens in this country will life their entire life without ever having to use force in self defense. The vast majority of private citizens who have guns will never have to use those guns in self defense.

So if we were going to only bother preparing for things that were likely to happen, none of us would have guns for self defense.

Of course that statement was silly, on purpose. So.... you're sticking to insisting a lightened trigger can get you in trouble while admitting there is zero actual evidence to support that.... with your reasoning being that it is just too difficult to find any evidence from lower courts because they aren't very public (even though lower court case after lower court case pertaining to the 2A in CA are routinely outlined in this very forum). I still call BS.

The 3.5# connector is one of the most common, if not THE most common, modification to Glock pistols, and as already stated above comes stock from Glock on some of the larger models. They certainly have been used in self defense time after time by this point. When a single instance of trigger pull weight is known to have been an issue at trial, then I'll agree with you.

fiddletown
03-28-2011, 12:22 PM
Of course that statement was silly, on purpose. I find it interesting that you are sticking to insisting that a 3.5# trigger is likely to get you in trouble after admitting there is zero actual evidence to support that.... with your reasoning being that it is just too difficult to find any evidence from lower courts because they aren't very public (even though lower court case after lower court case pertaining to the 2A in CA are routinely outlined in this very forum). I still call BS.Call BS all you want. Can you document a single instance, anywhere in the country, in which a private citizen fired a Glock with a 3.5 pound disconnector in self defense?

There is plenty of reason to believe that various factors can affect a jury. I've cited a few. I also know that if I were prosecuting a case in which someone used a Glock with a 3.5 pound disconnector, I'd find a way to use against you. Will that one factor guarantee a conviction? No, but it's not going to help your case with the jury; and your lawyer will need to expend some effort, at your expense, to deal with it. (And by the way, I'm not just going to argue the 3.5 pound disconnector, I'll also be arguing about how it was reckless of you to modify the gun in that way; and I'll have expert testimony to support that argument. The jury may well have trouble with a reckless character claiming self defense.)

On the other hand, do you really need a 3.5 pound disconnector in your Glock for self defense? Why can't you manage the stock trigger? People have successfully defended themselves with double action pistol sporting 12 pound triggers.

Why create an avoidable risk for yourself? It's a matter of risk management.

...The 3.5# connector is one of the most common, if not THE most common, modification to Glock pistols,... They certainly have been used in self defense time after time by this point...But you have no actual evidence. You're just guessing.

In any case, here's a little "grist for the mill":

http://scc.lexum.org/en/1993/1993scr3-76/1993scr3-76.html

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2811352&postcount=16

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2809981&postcount=6

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2817656&postcount=37

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2824637&postcount=66

The foregoing includes discussion of various cases in which a light trigger was an issue in court.

stix213
03-28-2011, 12:49 PM
Call BS all you want. Can you document a single instance, anywhere in the country, in which a private citizen fired a Glock with a 3.5 pound disconnector in self defense?

There is plenty of reason to believe that various factors can affect a jury. I've cited a few. I also know that if I were prosecuting a case in which someone used a Glock with a 3.5 pound disconnector, I'd find a way to use against you. Will that one factor guarantee a conviction? No, but it's not going to help your case with the jury; and your lawyer will need to expend some effort, at your expense, to deal with it. (And by the way, I'm not just going to argue the 3.5 pound disconnector, I'll also be arguing about how it was reckless of you to modify the gun in that way; and I'll have expert testimony to support that argument. The jury may well have trouble with a reckless character claiming self defense.)

On the other hand, do you really need a 3.5 pound disconnector in your Glock for self defense? Why can't you manage the stock trigger? People have successfully defended themselves with double action pistol sporting 12 pound triggers.

Why create an avoidable risk for yourself? It's a matter of risk management.

But you have no actual evidence. You're just guessing.

In any case, here's a little "grist for the mill":

http://scc.lexum.org/en/1993/1993scr3-76/1993scr3-76.html

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2811352&postcount=16

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2809981&postcount=6

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2817656&postcount=37

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2824637&postcount=66

The foregoing includes discussion of various cases in which a light trigger was an issue in court.

You seriously just cited a case that was acquitted where they modified their gun by cutting a spring shorter, not even a factory part? His cocked hammer appears to have been the biggest thing they took issue with. Would you argue you shouldn't have a CCW firearm with a cocked hammer as well?

Oh and I love this other one, a conviction from the case "Allen Gosset vs Her Majesty The Queen" where someone was running from a police officer and was shot IN THE BACK OF THE HEAD for no good reason. Please....

I'd also recommend against shooting unarmed people in the back of the head even with a stock trigger installed personally. Trigger modification shouldn't really be an issue there.

HondaMasterTech
03-28-2011, 1:55 PM
One could argue that the installation of the lighter connector allowed for greater trigger control and increased accuracy which, in turn, increases the safety of innocent bystanders in the event the unfortunate were to take place.

fiddletown
03-28-2011, 2:50 PM
You seriously just cited a case that was acquitted where they modified their gun by cutting a spring shorter, ...

Oh and I love this other one, a conviction from the case "Allen Gosset vs Her Majesty The Queen" ...Trigger modification shouldn't really be an issue there.But a light trigger pull became an issue in all the cases discussed.

[1] Alvarez' acquittal only came after an 8 week trial. Did the light trigger help turn a self defense matter that could have been dealt with easily into an ordeal that must have cost Alvarez several hundred thousand dollars?

[2] You have no way of predicting how your use of your gun in what you may believe is justified self defense will unfold. There's no guarantee that when the dust has settled everyone (including the DA) will agree that it was a clear case of a justified use of lethal force.

[3] You will have had to make your decision and act in but an instant. Everyone else will be able to second guess you at leisure. When the DA is deciding to prosecute, or your jury is deciding on your verdict, your use of a gun with a lightened trigger becomes a wild card -- but only if you used one.

One could argue that the installation of the lighter connector allowed for greater trigger control and increased accuracy which, in turn, increases the safety of innocent bystanders in the event the unfortunate were to take place. One could argue all kinds of things, BUT --

[1] You'll be paying your lawyer $300/hour (+/-) to do the arguing (plus research and preparation time and plus expert witness fees).

[2] Arguing something and the jury buying it, or even caring, are different things. Remember that the people on your jury will not know about, or be interested in, guns. And your argument is pretty much "inside baseball." The prosecutor will also be asking, and the jury wondering, why you didn't think you could shoot a gun as it came from the manufacturer, and like those used by cops, accurately.

[3] And if you can't manage a stock Glock adequately for self defense, you need a whole lot more training and practice.

Cokebottle
03-28-2011, 6:23 PM
Really? How sure are you? How good is your trigger finger discipline under extreme stress?
+10,000

Shocked fully awake from a deep sleep by CRASH! and perhaps the scream of a child. You will be shaking... all over. You will have no fine motor skills. You won't be able to FEEL your fingers. Your body will constrict the blood vessels in all of your extremities to ensure the maximum supply of oxygen to your brain.

Most of us would be doing good to remember to disable the safety on a 1911 or 92FS. We can only hope that our 2" groups @ 10 yards at the range translate to better than a 10" group at 5 yards under those conditions.

While I have not been in the above situation involving a gun and self defense, I have been in similar situations regarding sudden arousal from sleep.

Cokebottle
03-28-2011, 6:31 PM
Yet with the thousands and thousands of 3.5# connectors sold, has any of this ever happened even 1 time? I'm pretty sure the answer is a big fat NO.
And there's a good chance that the vast majority of those connectors have never been involved in a self-defense shoot.
If you still think that lightening your trigger is going to get you in trouble with the prosecutor,
I don't think it's an issue for the prosecutor in the criminal trial.
It seems that many/most "good shoots" result in no charges or dropped charges.

My concern is the civil trial... wrongful death and financial ruin for your family. Civil litigation attorneys will run a periscope up every orifice they can find, and then make up orifices to pull things out of that you never imagined. They will name anyone and everyone even remotely involved in the case.
They will do everything they can to instill doubt in the jury.... and in the civil trial, all he needs is a "preponderance of evidence"... You do not get to go home Scot-free under "reasonable doubt."

If he plants it into the jury's mind that you are a bloodthirsty, trigger-happy cowboy, you are not going to get a favorable ruling, even if the DA refused to press charges or you were acquitted in the criminal trial.

stix213
03-28-2011, 6:39 PM
And there's a good chance that the vast majority of those connectors have never been involved in a self-defense shoot.


Since the majority of Glocks haven't been involved in a self-defense shoot then this is obviously correct, and obviously irrelevant.


I don't think it's an issue for the prosecutor in the criminal trial.
It seems that many/most "good shoots" result in no charges or dropped charges.

My concern is the civil trial... wrongful death and financial ruin for your family. Civil litigation attorneys will run a periscope up every orifice they can find, and then make up orifices to pull things out of that you never imagined. They will name anyone and everyone even remotely involved in the case.
They will do everything they can to instill doubt in the jury.... and in the civil trial, all he needs is a "preponderance of evidence"... You do not get to go home Scot-free under "reasonable doubt."

If he plants it into the jury's mind that you are a bloodthirsty, trigger-happy cowboy, you are not going to get a favorable ruling, even if the DA refused to press charges or you were acquitted in the criminal trial.

Please please please, can you people making these claims actually point to a single instance of this ACTUALLY happening for the last time??? Yes I understand in theory its possible. That's because in theory you can make a pig fly with the correct wing design. What's important is if there is a realistic chance of this actually happening, and if no one can point to this ever have happening then its pretty clear there isn't much to worry about.

paul0660
03-28-2011, 6:40 PM
Fiddletown, hat tip for well researched and well written posts.............which also happen to agree with me. Thanks for a good job.

fiddletown
03-28-2011, 8:21 PM
....can you people making these claims actually point to a single instance of this ACTUALLY happening for the last time??? ...And can you point to a single instance of a Glock with a 3.5 pound connector actually having been fired in self defense? If that's never happened, or has happened only in a circumstance that was unquestionably justified, the legal consequences of using a Glock with a 3.5 pound connector have never been tested.

The 3.5# connector is one of the most common, ..., modification to Glock pistols, and as already stated above comes stock from Glock on some of the larger models... The models sold by Glock with a 3.5 pound connector (Models 34 and 35 according to post 27) are sold by Glock as competition models.

Fiddletown, hat tip for well researched and well written posts.......Thank you, sir.

wildhawker
03-28-2011, 8:32 PM
The models sold by Glock with a 3.5 pound connector (Models 34 and 35 according to post 27) are sold by Glock as competition models.

As a sidebar (and I do not intend to enter into the instant debate), Glock represents the 34/35 (http://www.glock.com/english/glock34.htm) to be "Tactical / Practical" models. If they were strictly "for competition" it would be a brighter line for a DA or civil lawyer, but a gun marketed as in the below sure seems like a good thing for personal self-defense:

Obtaining the greatest accuracy for target
engagement was the decisive reason for the
development of the GLOCK 34 with extended barrel,
greater slide dimensions and long distance between the
sights. (emphasis added.)

-Brandon

stix213
03-28-2011, 8:52 PM
nd can you point to a single instance of a Glock with a 3.5 pound connector actually having been fired in self defense? If that's never happened, or has happened only in a circumstance that was unquestionably justified, the legal consequences of using a Glock with a 3.5 pound connector have never been tested.

The models sold by Glock with a 3.5 pound connector (Models 34 and 35 according to post 27) are sold by Glock as competition models.


Glock 35 is the standard issue sidearm of the Kentucky State Police. I guess they just shoot for competition there in Kentucky right? Someone should let them know their officers are all going to get reamed in court.... I also as well have my doubts that any state trooper in Kentucky has ever had to fire their weapon in self defense :rolleyes:

Glock 35 is also used by a large number of SWAT teams across the country. For competition again of course I'm sure....

Is the FUD in this thread done yet or what?

fiddletown
03-28-2011, 9:01 PM
As a sidebar (and I do not intend to enter into the instant debate), Glock represents the 34/35 (http://www.glock.com/english/glock34.htm) to be "Tactical / Practical" models. If they were strictly "for competition" it would be a brighter line for a DA or civil lawyer, but a gun marketed as in the below sure seems like a good thing for personal self-defense:...You didn't quote the Glock marketing blurb in full.

[1] On the Glock website, the G34 and G35 are designated "Competition" in the chart (http://www.glock.com/english/index_pistols.htm) of the various models (the chart is found by following the like "models" at the left).

http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l142/fiddletown_2006/Random%20for%20boards/Screenshot2011-03-28at94957PM-2.png

[2] Glock says this (http://www.glock.com/english/glock34.htm) about the G34:

"Obtaining the greatest accuracy for target engagement was the decisive reason for the development of the GLOCK 34 with extended barrel, greater slide dimensions and long distance between the sights. This highly-accurate pistol has found widespread use as a competitive pistol for IPSC." (emphasis added)

[3] And this (http://www.glock.com/english/glock35.htm) about the G35:

"With its extended barrel and extended line of sight, the GLOCK 35 allows accurate hit patterns even with rapid firing. This has resulted in widespread distribution of the GLOCK 35 among the practical shooting community."(emphasis added)

And I submit that in context the reference to "practical shooting community" is a reference to IPSC/IDPA competitors and "Tactical/Practical" similarly refers to the action pistol games.

fiddletown
03-28-2011, 9:07 PM
Glock 35 is the standard issue sidearm of the Kentucky State Police. I guess they just shoot for competition there in Kentucky right? Someone should let them know their officers are all going to get reamed in court.... I also as well have my doubts that any state trooper in Kentucky has ever had to fire their weapon in self defense :rolleyes:

Glock 35 is also used by a large number of SWAT teams across the country. For competition again of course I'm sure....

Is the FUD in this thread done yet or what?[1] As I've demonstrated, the G34 and G35 are marketed by Glock for competition.

[2] What evidence do you have that the G35 as issued by the Kentucky State Police is issued with the 3.5 pound connector?

[3] What evidence do you have that the G35 as issued by various SWAT teams is issued with the 3.5 pound connector?

[4] Why should we believe that the OP, or others here who advocate the using a Glock with a 3.5 pound connector, has anywhere close to the level of training that SWAT team members have?

[5] Call it FUD as much as you like. Doing so merely demonstrates your complete inability to address and deal with the issues in a rational, cogent manner.

stix213
03-28-2011, 9:07 PM
You didn't quote the Glock marketing blurb in full.

[1] On the Glock website, the G34 and G35 are designated "Competition" in the chart (http://www.glock.com/english/index_pistols.htm) of the various models (the chart is found by following the like "models" at the left).

http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l142/fiddletown_2006/Random%20for%20boards/Screenshot2011-03-28at94957PM-2.png

[2] Glock says this (http://www.glock.com/english/glock34.htm) about the G34:

"Obtaining the greatest accuracy for target engagement was the decisive reason for the development of the GLOCK 34 with extended barrel, greater slide dimensions and long distance between the sights. This highly-accurate pistol has found widespread use as a competitive pistol for IPSC." (emphasis added)

[3] And this (http://www.glock.com/english/glock35.htm) about the G35:

"With its extended barrel and extended line of sight, the GLOCK 35 allows accurate hit patterns even with rapid firing. This has resulted in widespread distribution of the GLOCK 35 among the practical shooting community."(emphasis added)

And I submit that in context the reference to "practical shooting community" is a reference to IPSC/IDPA competitors and "Tactical/Practical" similarly refers to the action pistol games.

Again, standard issue sidearm of the Kentucky State Police. Case closed

stix213
03-28-2011, 9:09 PM
[1] As I've demonstrated, the G34 and G35 are marketed by Glock for competition.

[2] What evidence do you have that the G35 as issued by the Kentucky State Police is issued with the 3.5 pound connector?

[3] What evidence do you have that the G35 as issued by various SWAT teams is issued with the 3.5 pound connector?

[4] Why should we believe that the OP, or others here who advocate the using a Glock with a 3.5 pound connector, has anywhere close to the level of training that SWAT team members have?

[5] Call it FUD as much as you like. Doing so merely demonstrates your complete inability to address and deal with the issues in a rational, cogent manner.

First you say its a competition pistol not intended for self defense, and when that turns out to be a lie you change the subject? What evidence do you have that they have modified the gun from the default light connector? There are various forum postings on the interwebs that claim the Kentucky State Police runs the standard 3.5# trigger on their 35's.

fiddletown
03-28-2011, 9:18 PM
First you say its a competition pistol not intended for self defense, and when that turns out to be a lie you change the subject? What evidence do you have that they have modified the gun from the default light connector?Your contention so your burden of proof. You haven't even provided any evidence that the G35 is the standard issue sidearm for the Kentucky State Police.

And again, as shown, Glock identifies on its website the G34 and G35 as competition models.

stix213
03-28-2011, 10:11 PM
Your contention so your burden of proof. You haven't even provided any evidence that the G35 is the standard issue sidearm for the Kentucky State Police.

And again, as shown, Glock identifies on its website the G34 and G35 as competition models.

KSP uses the Glock 35:
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Kentucky+State+Police+Glock+35

Apparently its also an issue pistol for several PD's in San Diego County:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=83733

fiddletown
03-28-2011, 10:19 PM
KSP uses the Glock 35:
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Kentucky+State+Police+Glock+35

Apparently its also an issue pistol for several PD's in San Diego County:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=83733But nothing in either thread states that the guns are issued by the respective PDs with the 3.5 pound connector. We know that the NYPD issues Glocks, but we also have reason to know that they don't issue them with the standard connector (remember the "New York trigger").

wildhawker
03-28-2011, 10:35 PM
Your contention so your burden of proof. You haven't even provided any evidence that the G35 is the standard issue sidearm for the Kentucky State Police.

And again, as shown, Glock identifies on its website the G34 and G35 as competition models.

It shows them in a column indicating competition as a common use of the models, but that alone is no more dispositive of their intended use as a competition firearm than would be a picture of Bill Wilson shooting a CQB 1911 in an IDPA match. Glock says that they were "[d]eveloped for special units and shooters", and that "[o]ptimum hits results from longer length between sights", which, obviously, means the shooter was considerate and responsible enough to select a firearm designed for the ultimate in accuracy so they would not "spray bullets" at an unsuspecting public.

That a particularly accurate weapon has found "widespread use" in sports is not surprising, as any competitor wants the same thing as one engaged in an act of self-defense; namely, as many hits on target, and as fast as possible, to quickly end the threat.

Recall that, in the case of all Glock pistols, "[r]eleasing the trigger will automatically reactivate the safety", so a trigger must be significantly depressed in order to fire the weapon.

On to the conclusion: I have factory 1911s which were sold as "defensive" weapons having [crisp] 1-4lb factory triggers; I also have Glocks with factory triggers ranging from ~3.5-6lb. Which of these exposes me to the most liability? Answer: the one I shoot someone with.

There's no reasonable way to predict the response (or theory) of some unknown prosecutor or civil attorney in the speculative case of a hypothetical self-defense shoot in an uncertain venue and relating to an impossibly dynamic set of circumstances; (there's not enough jurisprudence to have even an anecdotal understanding of the economics). We take risks every day; some are reasonable, some are silly or outright dangerous. Actions and outcomes have consequences; not all of them are intentional or foreseen by even the most sage among us. Liberty means we get to choose how much risk we should incur, including the loss of liberty itself.

-Brandon

(P.S. Sorry for entering into the debate more than I intended; this is more to diffuse than to exacerbate it.)

stix213
03-28-2011, 10:44 PM
But nothing in either thread states that the guns are issued by the respective PDs with the 3.5 pound connector. We know that the NYPD issues Glocks, but we also have reason to know that they don't issue them with the standard connector (remember the "New York trigger").

There are several unofficial claims I can find on various forums that KSP has gone with the lighter trigger pull, and no claims I can find that KSP has increased the trigger pull weight. Unless you can find evidence to the contrary, I am going to believe the numerous unofficial claims.

http://www.realpolice.net/forums/firearms-4/15828-saftey-gun-3.html
A Kentucky State Police Glock has a 3.5 Lb. trigger
http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1261783
I know the Kentucky State Police use the GLock 35
They don't change a thing, and I know a KSP officer and aspire to be one, and to my knowledge they use the 3.5 which is really 4.5 in actuality.

This thread has gone a bit off topic, partly by me, so I am going to exit it with this last post. I think I've made my point though that there is no actual evidence that a Glock with a lighter trigger puts you in any greater danger of getting in trouble criminally or civilly when used for self defense (seeing that no one has provided any evidence beyond mere theory, an acquittal related mostly to a cocked hammer, and a convicted Canadian cop who shot an unarmed man in the back of the head, when there is reason to believe that one or more US LEA's run light Glock triggers themselves). Its all just FUD in my opinion. Do what you feel comfortable and responsible with your handgun.

Maestro Pistolero
03-28-2011, 10:48 PM
Glock claims the model 34/35 have 4.5 lb triggers. Don't know if that helps. I am actually interested in the Model 35, as I don't presently own a .40, and I don't yet have a Glock.

http://www.glock.com/english/glock34.htm
http://www.glock.com/english/glock34_tech.htm

It's OT, but does anyone know if the adjustable sights are, or could be ordered with tritium on these two models?

Thanks. Back to your regularly scheduled programming.

fiddletown
03-28-2011, 11:30 PM
It shows them in a column indicating competition as a common use of the models, .... Of course nothing prevents someone from using a G34 or G35 for anything he wants. But Glock still calls them competition models.

... the shooter was considerate and responsible enough to select a firearm designed for the ultimate in accuracy so they would not "spray bullets" at an unsuspecting public.... If your proficiency with a handgun is so poor that you are likely to "spray bullets at an unsuspecting public" using a Glock with a standard connector (1) a 3.5 pound connector isn't really likely to improve things for you; and (2) maybe you should just get a big stick.

...I have factory 1911s which were sold as "defensive" weapons having [crisp] 1-4lb factory triggers; I also have Glocks with factory triggers ranging from ~3.5-6lb. Which of these exposes me to the most liability? Answer: the one I shoot someone with...Not necessarily. First, we've seen cases in which a light trigger contributed to legal problems. It didn't matter why the trigger was light. So the heavier triggers will be more defensible.

And I have access to at least one expert witness who is a police armorer and instructor who will testify that (1) in his expert opinion a 1911 of between 4 and 5 pounds is satisfactory for a service weapon; (2) that as an armorer he will not set a trigger on a service weapon below 4.5 pounds; and (3) using a 1911 with a trigger less than 4 pounds is reckless.

I will keep my triggers in a range that I have an expert witness to support.

...There's no reasonable way to predict the response (or theory) of some unknown prosecutor or civil attorney in the speculative case of a hypothetical self-defense shoot in an uncertain venue and relating to an impossibly dynamic set of circumstances; (there's not enough jurisprudence to have even an anecdotal understanding of the economics). We take risks every day; some are reasonable, some are silly or outright dangerous. Actions and outcomes have consequences; not all of them are intentional or foreseen by even the most sage among us. Liberty means we get to choose how much risk we should incur, including the loss of liberty itself...[1] Of course I can't predict what an unknown prosecutor in some uncertain venue will do. And I have no control over him.

[2] But I do have control over the decisions I make and how I plan.

[3] And I have the opportunity to try to identify possible risks ahead of time and consider ways of mitigating or avoiding them, as long as I can to so without also jeopardizing other interests I might have.

[4] I know what sort of triggers on a self defense gun that I can find decent expert support for. And I've trained and practiced sufficiently to have confidence in my ability to make effective use of guns with such triggers.

[5] So I have no need or reason to court greater risk or liability.

...There are several unofficial claims I can find on various forums that KSP has gone with the lighter trigger pull, and no claims I can find that KSP has increased the trigger pull weight. Unless you can find evidence to the contrary, I am going to believe the numerous unofficial claims.

http://www.realpolice.net/forums/fir...tey-gun-3.html
A Kentucky State Police Glock has a 3.5 Lb. trigger
http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/show....php?t=1261783
I know the Kentucky State Police use the GLock 35
They don't change a thing, and I know a KSP officer and aspire to be one, and to my knowledge they use the 3.5 which is really 4.5 in actuality. There seems to be a hint on the Real Police thread that the KSP G35s have the 3.5 pound connector.

But a number of members on the Glock Talk thread (http://www.glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1261783) seem to think that Glock 34s and 35s issued by police departments don't have the light connector:

Post 5 -- ...the pistols intended for duty are sold with a standard connector....
Post 8 -- ...the ones I have seen for sale in LE stores have the standard 5.5 connector, some dept's require the heavier pull....
Post 11 -- I just purchased a Blue Label (LE) OD G34 through GSSF. It comes with 3 17 round mags, fixed sights, and the 5.5lb connector. To my knowledge, this is the way all LE Blue Label G34/G35's come from the factory.
Post 17 -- It is true that Blue Label G34's can be special ordered in a different configuration. However, Glock's standard production BLUE LABEL G34 comes with a 5.5lb connector, 3 17 round mags, and fixed sights....
Post 19 -- The Glocks sold to the police, that I am aware of (one department in my agency uses G35 and my brother is a firearms instructor there), do not come with the lighter connector - those are for the civilian market, the "practical" part...
Post 20 -- Actually, I believe you are wrong. KSP gets their guns with a heavier trigger...

Shenaniguns
03-29-2011, 7:38 AM
I initially installed a 3.5 pound connector on my G23 like so many others to improve accuracy on the range. However, now I am carrying the G23 as a CCW. Is there legal precident that will incriminate me if I use the weapon to defend myself? Should I convert it back to the stock trigger?


The once called 3.5# connector is now called a 4.5# connector and gives you a pull of 4-4.5 pounds, IMO that is about as light as I'd be willing to carry.

stag1500
03-29-2011, 11:04 AM
Just thinking that my lightened Glock trigger is probably close to the same pull weight for a lot of 1911 CCWs out there when it comes to defending trigger pull wt in court. Not worried about accidental firing as the gun will be in kydex holster with trigger guard. Finger will never be on trigger unless I intend to fire.

Exactly! You're more likely to get an accidental discharge from a single action pistol than from a pistol with a long, double action trigger like your Glock.

Your biggest concern should be hitting your target where it counts. If a lighter trigger pull improves your accuracy with your particular handgun, then go for it. Preserving your life should be the most important thing to you. That's my $0.02 worth.

stag1500
03-29-2011, 11:26 AM
Shocked fully awake from a deep sleep by CRASH! and perhaps the scream of a child. You will be shaking... all over. You will have no fine motor skills. You won't be able to FEEL your fingers. Your body will constrict the blood vessels in all of your extremities to ensure the maximum supply of oxygen to your brain.

Most of us would be doing good to remember to disable the safety on a 1911 or 92FS.

That's where training comes into play. It's not a 100% guarantee, but it does stack the odds in your favor. Through proper training, you develop muscle memory so that your index finger is not on the trigger as you're drawing from a holster. Even in the dark, you'll know if the slide safety is engaged or not on your 1911 because it just won't feel right if it is.

Corbin Dallas
03-29-2011, 1:46 PM
Might end up with some "Glock leg".
91789

Only if you have a serpa holster and cannot keep your booger hook of the bang stick when holstering your firearm.


This thread all boils down to training. Weight of a trigger is a moot point if you can't keep your finger off it.

Case in point:

6aSJgcpqePk

fiddletown
03-29-2011, 4:16 PM
... a long, double action trigger like your Glock....I don't know that I'd call a Glock trigger pull a "long double action." It's longer than a 1911, but a lot shorter and lighter than say a SIG.

...That's where training comes into play. ... Through proper training, you develop muscle memory so that your index finger is not on the trigger as you're drawing from a holster....We know about training and the benefits of training. We don't know how well trained the OP is.

...Your biggest concern should be hitting your target where it counts. If a lighter trigger pull improves your accuracy with your particular handgun, then go for it. Preserving your life should be the most important thing to you. That's my $0.02 worth.Well, you've promoted training. And the irony is that IME, folks who are well trained tend to be able to manage heavier triggers quite well. if one really needs a single action trigger lighter than 4.5 to 5 pound to shoot accurately, he really needs more training and practice.

...Weight of a trigger is a moot point if you can't keep your finger off it...On the other hand, Luis Alvarez intended to, and did, shoot, in what he believed was justified self defense. But because of the lightened trigger on the gun he used, he had to endure an eight week trial and pay legal bills well into six figures in order to convince a jury.

scarville
03-29-2011, 7:01 PM
Does all this mean I should not use a DA revolver that has had an action job for self defense?

fiddletown
03-29-2011, 7:48 PM
Does all this mean I should not use a DA revolver that has had an action job for self defense?I don't see how a double action revolver can be lightened enough to be a problem -- as long as you shoot it only double action. Cocking it could be a problem. Cocking a revolver looks like it was the underlying the issue with both Alvarez and Gosset.

Corbin Dallas
03-29-2011, 8:20 PM
I don't know that I'd call a Glock trigger pull a "long double action." It's longer than a 1911, but a lot shorter and lighter than say a SIG.

We know about training and the benefits of training. We don't know how well trained the OP is.

Well, you've promoted training. And the irony is that IME, folks who are well trained tend to be able to manage heavier triggers quite well. if one really needs a single action trigger lighter than 4.5 to 5 pound to shoot accurately, he really needs more training and practice.

On the other hand, Luis Alvarez intended to, and did, shoot, in what he believed was justified self defense. But because of the lightened trigger on the gun he used, he had to endure an eight week trial and pay legal bills well into six figures in order to convince a jury.

Convince a jury of what? That he "HAD" to defend his life? That he was in immenent danger? That the ONLY course of action was to move his finger off the frame of the gun and on to the trigger?

Sounds like he needed a better lawyer.

Attorney for the plantif (guy you just shot):

So you used a competition type trigger for your self defense gun. Can you tell us why?

My attorney: Objection, please define "competition type trigger"

Them: Less than xx lbs in trigger pull

Us: Please give an example of guns that are sold for self defense that have a trigger pull of less than xx lbs that you can purchase off the shelf.

Them: Uh...

Us: Here's a list. (name of many firearms here)

Them: Why did you feel the need for a lightened trigger?

Us: The need to be accurate in a self defense shooting is paramount. My client is only intent on defending his life against the immediate threat. The trigger weight of the firearm has no bearing on this case. My clients accuracy and competence with said firearm is.


This arguement can go ON and ON and ON.

Bottom line:

Q: Did you mean to shoot this person?
A: Yes


Tell me, how many rounds are fired in average during a police encounter?

Anyone see the San Diego sheriff incident a few years back when they surrounded the SUV and shot the driver? How many shots were fired? How many hit the driver?

Now, tell me how many innocent bystanders are hit by stray rounds from a CCW holder in self defense? How many shots are fired? How many hit the intended person?

If you can tell me that cops are more accurate wtih a 10lb trigger over a 3lb trigger that you can buy off the shelf on many 1911's and back it up with evidence, I'll believe you.

But beyond that, just because some crappy lawyer couldn't defend his client properly against the anti's doesn't mean carrying a firearm with a 3lb trigger is a poor choice.

On the other hand, if you carry a 10lb trigger and you miss your intended target, good luck convincing the jury "I didn't mean to", "it's what the police carry", etc... when you hit the innocent bystander in the background.

fiddletown
03-29-2011, 8:39 PM
Convince a jury of what? That he "HAD" to defend his life? That he was in immenent danger? ...All complete guess work on your part. You have no idea what actually went on, nor do I. What we know is that it took an 8 week trial and several hundred thousand dollars for Alvarez to win an acquittal.

And of course you apparently have no idea how things are done in court in the real world. You are simply fantasizing. For example:

...Attorney for the plantif (guy you just shot):

So you used a competition type trigger for your self defense gun. Can you tell us why?

My attorney: Objection, please define "competition type trigger"...Very nice, but the plaintiff/prosecutor will still be putting on an expert witness, probably an experienced law enforcement armorer and instructor.

That expert witness will be outlining the great dangers of a light trigger in a high stress encounter. That expert witness will testify that a light trigger would be considered reckless in a service weapon. And the jury of non-gun savvy folks, most of whom are probably a little afraid of guns, will be lapping that testimony up.

The defendant's self serving story will crash and burn in the minds of the jurors.

The bottom line is that you have no clue whatsoever of what it can take to influence a jury and how it is done.

Corbin Dallas
03-30-2011, 4:05 AM
All complete guess work on your part. You have no idea what actually went on, nor do I. What we know is that it took an 8 week trial and several hundred thousand dollars for Alvarez to win an acquittal.

And of course you apparently have no idea how things are done in court in the real world. You are simply fantasizing. For example:

Very nice, but the plaintiff/prosecutor will still be putting on an expert witness, probably an experienced law enforcement armorer and instructor.

That expert witness will be outlining the great dangers of a light trigger in a high stress encounter. That expert witness will testify that a light trigger would be considered reckless in a service weapon. And the jury of non-gun savvy folks, most of whom are probably a little afraid of guns, will be lapping that testimony up.

The defendant's self serving story will crash and burn in the minds of the jurors.

The bottom line is that you have no clue whatsoever of what it can take to influence a jury and how it is done.


You're right. Neither my father nor step father are attorneys.

Nor did I attend any law classes for college.

Nor did I go through NRA personal protection outside the home classes as a student or instructor.

None of my friends are in the law enforcement community and I have absolutely no idea what it takes to serve on a jury.

Sorry, my mistake. I must not have had my FiRAC in line.

fiddletown
03-30-2011, 5:16 AM
You're right. Neither my father nor step father are attorneys....But even if they are, you are not. I am.

...Nor did I go through NRA personal protection outside the home classes as a student or instructor....I'm also an NRA certified instructor in Personal Protection Inside the Home and Personal Protection Outside the Home, among others. Of course nothing in either the student or instructor classes for those courses prepares one to teach the legal aspects. That is why the NRA syllabuses for those courses require the instructor to engage an attorney, qualified LEO or POST certified instructor to teach the legal portion.

And that is why a local NRA Training Counselor will often ask me to teach the legal portion when he puts on a Personal Protection Inside the Home class.

...None of my friends are in the law enforcement community and I have absolutely no idea what it takes to serve on a jury....And from my own personal experience (having friends in law enforcement and having served on a jury) I know that's not the way one learns the law.

...Sorry, my mistake. I must not have had my FiRAC in line.And what does FIRAC (Facts, Issues, Rules, Apply, Conclusion), the approach to legal reasoning and case analysis taught to beginning law students, have to do with anything we're discussing?

And here's another of your mistakes: ...Convince a jury of what? That he "HAD" to defend his life? That he was in immenent danger? That the ONLY course of action was to move his finger off the frame of the gun and on to the trigger?...Do you think that's always that straight forward? Were, for example, the cases of Larry Hickey, Mark Abshire and Harold Fish (outlined here (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showpost.php?p=5449936&postcount=40)) just more bad lawyering?

If you're on trial, you've already failed to convince the DA and/or a grand jury that you have a good claim of justification. So now convincing a jury that in the same situation a reasonable and prudent person would have concluded that lethal force was necessary, over strenuous attack by the prosecution, just might take some doing.

Corbin Dallas
03-31-2011, 4:24 AM
But even if they are, you are not. I am.

I'm also an NRA certified instructor in Personal Protection Inside the Home and Personal Protection Outside the Home, among others. Of course nothing in either the student or instructor classes for those courses prepares one to teach the legal aspects. That is why the NRA syllabuses for those courses require the instructor to engage an attorney, qualified LEO or POST certified instructor to teach the legal portion.

And that is why a local NRA Training Counselor will often ask me to teach the legal portion when he puts on a Personal Protection Inside the Home class.

And from my own personal experience (having friends in law enforcement and having served on a jury) I know that's not the way one learns the law.

And what does FIRAC (Facts, Issues, Rules, Apply, Conclusion), the approach to legal reasoning and case analysis taught to beginning law students, have to do with anything we're discussing?

And here's another of your mistakes: Do you think that's always that straight forward? Were, for example, the cases of Larry Hickey, Mark Abshire and Harold Fish (outlined here (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showpost.php?p=5449936&postcount=40)) just more bad lawyering?

If you're on trial, you've already failed to convince the DA and/or a grand jury that you have a good claim of justification. So now convincing a jury that in the same situation a reasonable and prudent person would have concluded that lethal force was necessary, over strenuous attack by the prosecution, just might take some doing.


You're right. Do as you wish. You are all knowing, I know nothing.

I'll be certain to up my trigger pull to 10lbs and put a brady saftey on it. Don't want anyone to get hurt you know.

fiddletown
03-31-2011, 5:49 AM
...I know nothing....I'll accept that.

...I'll be certain to up my trigger pull to 10lbs and put a brady saftey on it. Don't want anyone to get hurt you know. Holy Straw-man, Batman!

HondaMasterTech
03-31-2011, 7:27 AM
Only if you have a serpa holster and cannot keep your booger hook of the bang stick when holstering your firearm.


This thread all boils down to training. Weight of a trigger is a moot point if you can't keep your finger off it.

Case in point:

6aSJgcpqePk

She almost killed someone. lol and the perp looks up like, "Holy crap, lady! Would you like me to hold that for you?!"

scarville
03-31-2011, 7:44 AM
Reading this thread I get an image in my head of the scene where Morpheus is explaining to Neo that the Matrix is a system based on rules.

The legal system, like the Matrix of the movie with the same name, is a system based on rules and it doesn't care whether you know them or not. If anything approaching justice is accomplished within that system it is a byproduct. If you are involved in a shooting and are 100% justified ethically, morally, and logically but break one of the rules there are numerous bits of pond scum masquerading as lawyers who will try to crucify you. If self-defense is a mindset that enables you to respond to threats then, in the modern world, your preparation must include the threat posed by the legal system.

Corbin Dallas
03-31-2011, 7:38 PM
I'll accept that.

Holy Straw-man, Batman!


Glad you are showing your true colors here. Typical lawyer, choose what you want others to read instead of the entire quote.


Remind me where you live? I want to make sure not to hire you for any PPOTH classes.

Corbin Dallas
03-31-2011, 7:38 PM
Reading this thread I get an image in my head of the scene where Morpheus is explaining to Neo that the Matrix is a system based on rules.

The legal system, like the Matrix of the movie with the same name, is a system based on rules and it doesn't care whether you know them or not. If anything approaching justice is accomplished within that system it is a byproduct. If you are involved in a shooting and are 100% justified ethically, morally, and logically but break one of the rules there are numerous bits of pond scum masquerading as lawyers who will try to crucify you. If self-defense is a mindset that enables you to respond to threats then, in the modern world, your preparation must include the threat posed by the legal system.

Best quote ever.

fiddletown
03-31-2011, 8:06 PM
....I'll accept that.

Holy Straw-man, Batman!....

Glad you are showing your true colors here. Typical lawyer, choose what you want others to read instead of the entire quote....Your entire first paragraph in post 79 was:You're right. Do as you wish. You are all knowing, I know nothing.Now everyone can decide for himself if what I redacted when I quoted you in post 71 changed your meaning.

...Remind me where you live? I want to make sure not to hire you for any PPOTH classes. You have no worries. I only work with other instructors I respect.