Home Defense Gun Modifications

[mansysinatra]

Actually you wouldn't. Theses posts by others on Pistol Forum explain why:

• (Caselaw; the state spinning a narrative):
  

  https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?27448-Punisher-Skull-on-a-Self-Defense-Firearm&p=643762&viewfull=1#post643762

  
  
  
• (More on why asking for caselaw is useless. )
  

  https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?27448-Punisher-Skull-on-a-Self-Defense-Firearm&p=644154&viewfull=1#post644154

  
  
  
• ( Caselaw, again.)
  https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....l=1#post644594

I'm posting the links because the posts are comments from other lawyers who explain, perhaps better than I have in the past, why we don't find cases.

The burden of proof is on the person making the claim.

Might as well recommend against using and/or owning an AR because the jury will look unfavorably on that. Given the anti-gun climate here, we might as well recommend against "fully semiautomatic" pistols and therefore only recommend revolvers for self defense.

I'd like some citations, not conjecture. If you don't actually know, it's better to say, "I don't have evidence/proof of why X is a bad idea, but I have some assumptions I think are important".

[Citadelgrad87]

Actually you wouldn't. Theses posts by others on Pistol Forum explain why:

• (Caselaw; the state spinning a narrative):
  

  https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?27448-Punisher-Skull-on-a-Self-Defense-Firearm&p=643762&viewfull=1#post643762

  
  
  
• (More on why asking for caselaw is useless. )
  

  https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?27448-Punisher-Skull-on-a-Self-Defense-Firearm&p=644154&viewfull=1#post644154

  
  
  
• ( Caselaw, again.)
  https://pistol-forum.com/showthread....l=1#post644594

I'm posting the links because the posts are comments from other lawyers who explain, perhaps better than I have in the past, why we don't find cases.

Actually, you would. Can an unconnected person simply type “modified gun=bad” into Westlaw and come up with examples?

No.

Can someone like Mas Ayoob, who has been claiming this for years and who has been an expert in the field? Of course. He doesn’t have any good examples,es, though.

It’s one thing to play it safe and stack everything possible in your favor before a shooting.

It’s quite another to speak authoritatively that this IS the case, but without evidence that this is so. With all the gun enthusiasts involved at every level of the criminal justice system, and with the media being hyperaware of any sexy gun stories, it’s a big fat zero.

[fiddletown]

...I'd like some citations, not conjecture.....

[fiddletown]

on this audio attorney Andrew Branca is interviewed and explains why he thinks that a modification which affects the firing functions of a gun is a bad idea when you plan to carry the gun or use it for self defense. Mr. Branca is an attorney (formerly in Massachusetts and now in Colorado) who has specialized in self defense law since 1997.

[smle-man]

Anything that is done to (modifications to make the firearm more 'tactical') or used in (reloads instead of factory ammunition) a firearm involved in a shooting can be used to influence a jury. It won't make the case but it is 'flavoring' that a skilled prosecutor or civil attorney can use to steer a jury in the direction of a person looking for trouble rather than retreating/calling 911, etc.

Believe what you want but the prudent person should consider all angles if one thinks he/she will use the firearm in self defense.

[Win231]

Anything that is done to (modifications to make the firearm more 'tactical') or used in (reloads instead of factory ammunition) a firearm involved in a shooting can be used to influence a jury. It won't make the case but it is 'flavoring' that a skilled prosecutor or civil attorney can use to steer a jury in the direction of a person looking for trouble rather than retreating/calling 911, etc.

Believe what you want but the prudent person should consider all angles if one thinks he/she will use the firearm in self defense.

^^^ Well said!
I think some gun owners are resistant to this logic because they see it as a form of gun control or gun restriction.

[CandG]

I can't think of a single way a prosecutor could spin it to hurt your case, especially when you have a legitimate reason for the modification (the factory gun doesn't fit right in your hand).

Here's the only example that I could find of a modification being used against someone: http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/201...-him-in-court/

Attorneys for the victim, Daniel Shaver, argued Brailsford was malicious during the shooting and raised questions about the gun used.

The Maricopa County Attorney’s Office said Shaver was on his hands and knees when Brailsford shot him five times inside a Mesa hotel. The gun used was a personal AR-15 assault weapon that had been approved for service use by the Mesa Police Department. However, Mesa police noted that their investigation of the shooting turned up a vulgar inscription on the rifle that doesn’t meet department policy.

“Inscripted on the officer’s gun, and I hate to use profanity, but it said, “you’re f*****,”’ Laney Sweet, Daniel Shaver’s wife said.

According to several sources, the rifle’s vulgar inscription is on the inside of the rifle’s dust cover. The inscription is only visible if the dust cover is open, which happens automatically in order to eject spent rounds while the weapon is fired.

“That statement tells me this is a person who’s enthusiastic about killing people,” Marc Victor, lawyer for Sweet and her late husband, argued. “That’s what that inscription means.”

I just don't see any possible way that a prosecutor could convincingly claim to a jury that you had malicious intent simply because you changed out your trigger to something more comfortable.

ETA: It's also worth noting that the officer in the case I cited above was ultimately acquitted.

[BigPimping]

I would not modify a firearm. Outside of maybe night sights or light. Who knows what the courts might do.

[Mayor McRifle]

I'd never modify the internals of a carry gun.

Why not? Wouldn't you want your carry gun to be better functioning and more accurate so as to avoid missing your target and hitting innocent bystanders (not to mention failing to stop the person who was presenting an imminent threat of death or great bodily injury to you)?

[mansysinatra]

The threads you linked were specifically about case law citations.

You are correct in thinking you linked a thread about case law and gun modifications.

Had I posted asking solely about citing case law and gun modifications, your links would be sufficient.

As I thought I had explained, what I was searching for an option of slightly decreasing the trigger pretravel/length of pull without reducing the trigger pull weight.

I then asked if anyone had evidence of why my proposed modification would be unadvisable.

There are always different perspectives and I'm sorting them out for my personal choice.

https://www.gun-tests.com/issues/29_11/features/Gun-Owners-and-Self-Defense-Rights-26793-1.html

https://blog.cheaperthandirt.com/trigger-pull-modifications-legal-trouble-waiting-happen/

- "should you be concerned legally about a trigger modification you make to your firearm? We put the question to Kirk Evans, president of Texas Law Shield and U.S. Law Shield to find out."

https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/customizing-defensive-pistol/

https://www.full30.com/video/9b9e6aa51a7668b9b13e2ee7dcb62e6c

[fiddletown]

I'd never modify the internals of a carry gun. ...

Why not? Wouldn't you want your carry gun to be better functioning and more accurate so as to avoid missing your target and hitting innocent bystanders (not to mention failing to stop the person who was presenting an imminent threat of death or great bodily injury to you)?

I won't speak for mansysinatra, but speaking for myself no modifications would be necessary or helpful to improve the functioning and accuracy of any of the guns I might use for self defense. They function just fine and are accurate as they are.

If one is really concerned about good hits on the target training and practice are more important than modifying the gun (unless you're stuck with using a really lousy gun). And modifications won't go very far toward making up for a lack of skill.

[fiddletown]

The threads you linked were specifically about case law citations.

You are correct in thinking you linked a thread about case law and gun modifications.

Had I posted asking solely about citing case law and gun modifications, your links would be sufficient.

As I thought I had explained, what I was searching for an option of slightly decreasing the trigger pretravel/length of pull without reducing the trigger pull weight.....

I understood your question, but I really wasn't responding to that. I was simply responding to L84CABO's statement in post 14 that we should see a bunch of cases if there is really a legal issue.

As for your "gun test" and YouTube references, there's something of a difference of opinion on the question. For a different view listen to the Andrew Branca interview to which I linked in post 19.

As far as how one deals with that difference of opinion, that's pretty much up to you. Personally, I try to avoid possible "wild cards."

Yes, your defense lawyer can move to exclude evidence of gun modification, but such motions won't always be successful.

Yes, your defense lawyer will try to get you the best jury he can out of the jury pool available, but the prosecution will be trying to get the best possible jury for the prosecution; and you're limited to the jury pool. The composition of the jury will not be entirely within your control.

Yes, your defense lawyer can put on expert witnesses to explain the utility of any modifications, but the prosecution can call experts as well. And since it's doubtful that anyone on the jury will be a "gun person", some of the explanations about why a modification was a good idea might be too "inside baseball" and not resonate with a juror who might not have much interest in the subject.

Yes, the issue is the justification for your act of violence, but you don't have the final say on that question. It will be up to the jury and how that jury evaluates your story. Several years ago a lawyer by the name of Lisa Steele wrote an excellent article for lawyers on defending a self defense case. The article was entitled "Defending a Self Defense Case" and published in the March, 2007, edition of the journal of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, The Champion. It was republished in four parts, with permission, on the website, Truth About Guns. The article as republished can be read here: Part 1; Part 2; Part 3; and Part 4.

As Ms. Steele explains the unique character of a self defense case in Part 1:

...Self-defense is all-or-nothing. In order to establish it, the client has to admit being at the crime scene, with a weapon, which he or she used to intentionally harm the aggressor. The client has to admit that he injured the aggressor. The client has to convince the jury that if a reasonable person had been standing in his shoes, the reasonable person would have done the same thing. In effect, the aggressor invited his fate by threatening or inflicting serious bodily harm, or by threatening to kill the client.

In one fell swoop, the client has given up alibi and mistaken identity defenses. He or she has given up any claim that the wound was made by accident. Generally, the client must give up provocation (heat of passion or extreme emotional disturbance). Logically, provocation implies an unreasonable response to a situation, and mitigates murder to manslaughter. Self-defense implies a rational response to a very dangerous situation and, if successful, results in an acquittal. Similarly, the client must give up claims of mental illness or insanity and defenses based on intoxication or drug use....
...

... Often, the defendant will need to testify in order to establish his subjective belief about the threat and need to respond defensively. This can be done through circumstantial evidence, but it is difficult....

Kind of the bottom line is that whether a gun modification could hurt you in court will depend on some things over which neither you nor your lawyer will have any control. And even if the modification is unlikely to hurt your in court, it most likely won't help you in court.

Some modifications are probably less likely to hurt you in court. Super light triggers or disabling a safety would probably be the most problematic. Things like better sights, grips or grip modifications to improve hand fit, or refinishing for durability are probably pretty benign. I'm not sure about reducing the length of the trigger pull on your XD, if that's even possible without reducing the weight of pull; and so I'll offer no opinion on that question.

[Chewy65]

Anything that is done to (modifications to make the firearm more 'tactical') or used in (reloads instead of factory ammunition) a firearm involved in a shooting can be used to influence a jury. It won't make the case but it is 'flavoring' that a skilled prosecutor or civil attorney can use to steer a jury in the direction of a person looking for trouble rather than retreating/calling 911, etc.

Believe what you want but the prudent person should consider all angles if one thinks he/she will use the firearm in self defense.

"Flavoring" will be kept out of court by a motion in limine under Evidence Code 352. If a motion in limine is not brought and your skilled prosecutor brings in patently irrelevant prejudicial material he/she risks a dressing down from the judge and/or the judge upholding an objection and instructing the jury to disregard. That brings up the old saw that you cannot unring the bell but risk losing credibility with the jury.

[Rodell]

With most modifications no one is going to know, anyway.

[Citadelgrad87]

I won't speak for mansysinatra, but speaking for myself no modifications would be necessary or helpful to improve the functioning and accuracy of any of the guns I might use for self defense. They function just fine and are accurate as they are.

If one is really concerned about good hits on the target training and practice are more important than modifying the gun (unless you're stuck with using a really lousy gun). And modifications won't go very far toward making up for a lack of skill.