Tweet
Was curious on what some of the thoughts might be around installing the Glock Performance Trigger (GPT) in a Glock pistol intended for duty use. Assuming the agencies policy allows for it, can anyone give me some cons against doing it? The trigger weight would be reduced from 5.5 lbs to about 4lbs. The overall movement is much smoother, and I feel would contribute to an overall increase in accuracy. I should also say I've done a bit of research on this issue as well, specifically in order to dispel some potential "myths" about reducing trigger weight on a duty pistol and what some would argue could increase an officer's criminal liability by doing so.
First off, I have over 10 years of experience in law enforcement. About 3.5 years was spent investigating homicides and officer uses of force, including officer involved shootings, of which I have been involved in 3 OIS investigations. One of those investigations was eventually taken by the DOJ.
In speaking with our local county forensic crime lab, I was told that when they evaluate and test an officers gun when used in an OIS, they conduct an overall function test to make sure the firearm, and it's safeties, internal or external, are working. They will test the trigger weight using various tools to assist them with their overall evaluation, however they DO NOT publish, nor will they testify to the weight of a firearms trigger for at least two reasons:
1) there is no standard for trigger weight on a duty firearm.
2) the methods and tools they use to test trigger weight have not been scientifically validated, specifically, they do not know the standard measure of error for the equipment used.
The person I spoke with also added that it becomes even less of an issue because it is a Glock factory part, ensuring overall functionality.
As I mentioned before, one of the incidents I helped investigate was eventually taken over by the CA DOJ's team. I spoke with the lead special agent on the DOJ side, and from what he told me, their crime labs essentially conduct the same series of evaluations. I will be reaching out to the state DOJ lab tomorrow to hear from a scientist in their firearms unit.
The packaging on the GPT states, "Does not meet NIJ Standards for LE use." Well, the NIJ, or the National Institute of Justice, is a federal guideline, and adherence to it is voluntary. I spoke to a firearms instructor for Glock, and based on his assessment, it sounded like the addition of that verbiage on their packaging was essentially CYA.
All this said, to even present such evidence in a criminal court would face several serious challenges. The addition of such evidence would lack foundation due to the lack of a scientific process to test the trigger weight, and such evidence would also lack relevance because there is no set standard for CA law enforcement duty pistol trigger weight. For many many years officers carried various models of DA/SA pistols, and when in in SA mode, the trigger weight was much less than 4 lbs.
This post is intended to help me work through this issue as it pertains to an officers direct criminal liability by installing such a modification. This is not meant to discuss the potential civil outcomes, as the standards for submitting evidence are much different, and basically plaintiffs will throw anything at the wall that they can in hopes that something sticks. If the modification is discovered by the plaintiff side, I can see them using the modification as evidence against the officer's character, trying to paint him/her as some kind of gung-ho maniac that wanted to kill the decedent.
Let me know what I'm missing. Thanks for reading!
First off, I have over 10 years of experience in law enforcement. About 3.5 years was spent investigating homicides and officer uses of force, including officer involved shootings, of which I have been involved in 3 OIS investigations. One of those investigations was eventually taken by the DOJ.
In speaking with our local county forensic crime lab, I was told that when they evaluate and test an officers gun when used in an OIS, they conduct an overall function test to make sure the firearm, and it's safeties, internal or external, are working. They will test the trigger weight using various tools to assist them with their overall evaluation, however they DO NOT publish, nor will they testify to the weight of a firearms trigger for at least two reasons:
1) there is no standard for trigger weight on a duty firearm.
2) the methods and tools they use to test trigger weight have not been scientifically validated, specifically, they do not know the standard measure of error for the equipment used.
The person I spoke with also added that it becomes even less of an issue because it is a Glock factory part, ensuring overall functionality.
As I mentioned before, one of the incidents I helped investigate was eventually taken over by the CA DOJ's team. I spoke with the lead special agent on the DOJ side, and from what he told me, their crime labs essentially conduct the same series of evaluations. I will be reaching out to the state DOJ lab tomorrow to hear from a scientist in their firearms unit.
The packaging on the GPT states, "Does not meet NIJ Standards for LE use." Well, the NIJ, or the National Institute of Justice, is a federal guideline, and adherence to it is voluntary. I spoke to a firearms instructor for Glock, and based on his assessment, it sounded like the addition of that verbiage on their packaging was essentially CYA.
All this said, to even present such evidence in a criminal court would face several serious challenges. The addition of such evidence would lack foundation due to the lack of a scientific process to test the trigger weight, and such evidence would also lack relevance because there is no set standard for CA law enforcement duty pistol trigger weight. For many many years officers carried various models of DA/SA pistols, and when in in SA mode, the trigger weight was much less than 4 lbs.
This post is intended to help me work through this issue as it pertains to an officers direct criminal liability by installing such a modification. This is not meant to discuss the potential civil outcomes, as the standards for submitting evidence are much different, and basically plaintiffs will throw anything at the wall that they can in hopes that something sticks. If the modification is discovered by the plaintiff side, I can see them using the modification as evidence against the officer's character, trying to paint him/her as some kind of gung-ho maniac that wanted to kill the decedent.
Let me know what I'm missing. Thanks for reading!
Comment