Defensive gun modifications

[WDE91]

I recently posted a thread on a different forum about Glock triggers and got a stereotypical response of.

"When it comes to defensive guns, I wouldn't touch it. Anything you do to modify one could potentially be used against you in a courtroom. I know this sounds silly, but it's possible. I just prefer not to do anything that could make it more "deadly" in the eyes of someone who has no idea about guns."

Is anyone one aware of a single court case in that a LEGAL modification was used against the victim in court?
I'm aware of certain jurisdictions that prevent ccw holders from making modifications(Orange County) but not any court cases.
My local jurisdiction does not have any clauses about modifications.

[LowThudd]

Not me personally, but Massad Ayoob has, and written on the subject. Here is one example. http://backwoodshome.com/blogs/Massa...nal-gun-locks/

I did not remove the internal lock, for the simple reason that I’ve seen a prosecutor raise hell about a deactivated safety device when trying to establish the element of recklessness that is a key ingredient in a manslaughter conviction. “Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the defendant was so reckless that he DEACTIVATED A SAFETY DEVICE ON A LETHAL WEAPON, and so arrogant that he thought he knew more about the gun than the factory that made it!” That’s a mountain I’d rather not have to climb in court, nor debate in front of twelve jurors selected in part by opposing counsel for their lack of knowledge of firearms.

Below are a few excerpts from The Massad Ayoob Chronicles, but you might want to read the whole thing. http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/201...nicles-part-i/

Massad Ayoob is recognized around the world as an expert in personal defense. He’s been “on the job” with law enforcement since 1972, and has written countless articles, books and courses on self-defense. He’s also been called as an expert witness in hundreds of self-defense cases. I interviewed him by phone this week, on personal defense topics, and asking a number of questions that TTAG readers supplied on the site. What follows is a transcription of the first portion of the interview.

The two things I would strongly advise against doing and have strongly advised against doing, would be a trigger pull lighter than the factory recommends, and removal or de-activation of a safety device.

You try not to give weapons to your opponent. If I have an [opposing] attorney trying to nail my scalp to the wall, I’m not gonna give him the sound bite of “Ladies and gentlemen, you’re here to determine whether this man was reckless, and arrogant, and negligent. Ladies and gentlemen, he was so reckless, he deactivated the safety device on a lethal weapon. And he was so arrogant, he thought he knew more about this gun than the designer.” Tell me how you’re gonna get past that.

As far as the light trigger pull, your problem there, number one, is it has historically been linked to unintended discharges. So problem one, under stress, we SAY we’re gonna keep our finger off the trigger.

Second, you can go to court and say “I didn’t accidentally discharge the gun, I always keep my finger outside the trigger.” And they will then hit you with the bomb. “So, you want this jury to believe that you’re incapable of making a mistake? You’re the first perfect human being in two thousand and ten years. Is that what you’re telling this jury?” Now that is gonna be a pretty tough sell.

Where the accidental discharge theory comes, is they know you have a justifiable shooting, but you’ve got either the rare prosecutor that is politically driven and has some political hay to make by hanging you out to dry, or the much less-rare plaintiff’s lawyer who’s trying to sue you or your insurance company for something – mainly your insurance company.

The other is in the civil case. The plaintiff’s lawyer is not looking for justice – they are looking for money. There are damn few people who are both so rich and so stupid, that if I won a civil judgement of a million dollars against them, there would be an unprotected, liquid million dollars that I could put my claws on and seize to satisfy the judgement.

[P5Ret]

My concern would be more on the civil side than the criminal side, a good use of self defense is not going to change because of the tool used. Now in civil court where the threshold for a judgement against you is lower, I'd be willing to bet that's where most problems with mods will occur.