Legal ramifications on changing internal parts on a self-defense weapon ?

Freedom Forged

Regular Member
Should you need to use your pistol to defend yourself and/or others you are trying to protect. (Friends/Family etc)

We know your gun will be seized and I assume at some point inspected by someone.

Their are two schools of thought on this.

The group that say's; In court the Prosecution will rip you apart when they discover you don't have all OEM parts in you pistol. "you changed the parts in you gun to increase it's lethality didn't you Mr __________?

The other group that say's; Damn the consequence's I'll deal with that when the time comes I want any advantage I can get should I need to use my gun.

Your thoughts on changing your OEM for Aftermarket parts? The trigger assembly for example......
FF
 

K.O.A.M.

Amateur
The issue will primarily be always was it a good shoot or not a good shoot for criminal liability. If it is a good shoot for criminal liability, you may be entitled to immunity in some states from civil suit-Florida has a provision if the individual shot is convicted of a forcible felony as a result of the actions that got them shot, any lawyer that files suit on their behalf will be liable for triple attorneys' fees to the individual who defended themselves.

If it is for civil liability purposes, the arguments against modification will be that it demonstrated some sort of intent or predisposition to shoot someone. It would be a stretch to call any of the modifications "more lethal" if it can be shown that the modifications were to increase accuracy or reliability. After all, it's shooting the same bullet before you put the Punisher backplate on your pistol. That being said, it will take a skilled lawyer to get arguments that you intended to make the gun "more lethal" by modifying it suppressed through a motion in limine.

One thing that's always made me slightly sketchy is when a part is labeled "competition" and then is used for duty or self-defense. I can see an argument being made that the gun owner thought this was a game and used a weapon designed for "competition" when duty gear was available.

If, however, those aftermarket parts lead to a malfunction and cause the firearm to discharge inadvertently, you're on your own. There will be no factory warranty, and it will be pointed out ad nauseum that you took out perfectly good parts and replaced them with dangerous ones at the civil trial. Personally, I do not modify fire control parts on anything that I might reasonably plan to use to defend myself. That's because I have seen litigation where a trigger pull was reduced outside factory specifications through wear and tear and it led to some adverse consequences.
 

jBravo3

Regular Member
I agree with the post above. I think the main issue is just whether or not deadly force was justified, if force was applied righteously, etcetera. I certainly don't want to downplay or disregard the reality of civil litigation, but here is my summary on this.

Over the years, I think this topic has kind of turned into one of those urban myths people like to talk about. It started when people who had no business working on guns were setting up revolvers with hair triggers and things of the sort, which opened the door for increased liabilty in instances of negligence.

When guys like Massad Ayoob started saying/printing don't mod your carry guns they had their reasons but I think times have changed, technology has changed, laws have changed, public perception, and on and on.

Don't get rid of safety features and be able/prepared to articulate why modifications were done - and be prepared to do so under close scrutiny.

If you can't articulate exactly why that whiz bang trigger in your Glock 19 is an asset then don't put it in. If you can explain it, have it professionally installed by "a competent gunsmith" (with verifiable creds) if you haven't got an armorer cert. Be able to explain why the OEM plastic sights were exchanged for better sights. Why is that Surefire X300 on there again? Yep-that light counts as a "mod" too. You get the idea.

If the mods are done to increase accuracy and reliability, then you are doing so to increase the safety of yourself and others, which is why we are carrying a pistol in the first place. Right?

Aaron Cowan (Sage Dynamics) posted a really good YouTube video on this topic entitled "EDC Handgun Modifications." Check it out. Good info.
 

M80Ball

Newbie
Like the others have said, it's not really a concern. If it's determined to be a bad shoot then the prosecution's mind isn't gonna be on the fact that you replaced a 5.5lb trigger with a 3.5lb trigger and used handloads. There hasn't been a case where a prosecutor tried to use some bullshit argument like that. If one tried to do so, I'd imagine it'd be dispelled pretty quickly. In NC, if a shoot is legally justified then you're also free from any civil liability as well, so there's no worries on the civil front either.
 

Ben H

Member
On top of all that, 99% of the time the only thing that is performed on a firearm when one is taken, is simply an operability test. Crime lab fires a round to verify it is, "functional," ... saves the bullet and brass for comparison ... and ships it back to the PD where it sits in property. Nobody disassembles it or looks at the internals because it's not relevant to the case. If it's not an obvious modification, no one would ever notice, thus no one would ever bring it up. Even with firearm mods, the only thing that I've ever heard becoming an issue is if you have an external engraving that says you're bloodthirsty and looking for a fight ... something like, "Eat Sh*t and Die Mother F*cker!!!"
 

MojoNixon

Established
Like the others have said, it's not really a concern. If it's determined to be a bad shoot then the prosecution's mind isn't gonna be on the fact that you replaced a 5.5lb trigger with a 3.5lb trigger and used handloads. There hasn't been a case where a prosecutor tried to use some bullshit argument like that. If one tried to do so, I'd imagine it'd be dispelled pretty quickly. In NC, if a shoot is legally justified then you're also free from any civil liability as well, so there's no worries on the civil front either.
NV is supposed to have the same civil liability protection, as well.
 

M80Ball

Newbie
NV is supposed to have the same civil liability protection, as well.
Yet there's a statutory exemption to LEOs during the discharge of duties, so an officer involved in a good shooting can still be sued over the shooting. Makes absolutely no sense. I'm thankful that civs are covered of course, but it'd make a hell of a lot more sense if everyone was covered.
 

Fatboy

Established
Do you know if the LEO has to be sued in his professional capacity, rather than personally?


Most LEO lawsuits start out as being sued in the professional capacity, and at the hearings it is then determined if the officer was acting within the scope and training of his employment. If he was within the scope, then qualified immunity attaches, and the department/ town is on the hook. If he was outside of his lane, then no Q.I. and he gets to own his issues legally and financially.
 

Ben H

Member
On top of all that, 99% of the time the only thing that is performed on a firearm when one is taken, is simply an operability test. "
Correction / update ... our state crime lab will also measure the trigger weight when firearms are submitted and include it in the report.
 

ggammell

Does not pass up an opportunity to criticize P&S.
Correction / update ... our state crime lab will also measure the trigger weight when firearms are submitted and include it in the report.

Mind staying what state? I know that's not part of the VA DFS protocol.
 

Ben H

Member
Ohio Bureau of Criminal Investigations crime lab. It was a highly publicized OIS that made national news, so I don't know if that made a difference. Just recently found that out, so I'm asking other questions and will post up what I find out.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

voodoo_man

Established
Two cases stick out in my mind - one was with a guy who had something written on his firearm, note exactly sure what the point of bringing it up was other than "intent" or whatever. The other was the NYPD rookie housing officer (Asian guy) whose only point of contention was that his gun had a weighted trigger he was not familiar/trained well with.

Other than that, does anyone have any actual case law, cases to reference? Until I see actual cases on this topic, it's all speculation to me.

Obviously don't go out and get "smile for bang" etched into your barrel or "kill machine" on your slide - that's just stupid.
 

Ben H

Member
I scrolled through lab reports on our OISs and homicides over the past few years which had firearms submitted to either the state labs (Ohio BCI) and the local crime lab (former is free with lengthy turnaround, the latter you pay for but get a quick turnaround). With both cases, an operability test and matching of casings / rounds fired during operability to evidence at scene were the only things performed. Have not got a response back from neighboring jurisdiction ref the case with the highly publicized shooting that had trigger weight tested.
 

Matt0311

Member
The guy out west had something like "Die Motherfucker" on his rifle and it was a bad shoot even without that. The NYPD shooting, I don't remember that angle, just that he essentially fired as a startle response. That's a training issue not a tool issue.

Two cases stick out in my mind - one was with a guy who had something written on his firearm, note exactly sure what the point of bringing it up was other than "intent" or whatever. The other was the NYPD rookie housing officer (Asian guy) whose only point of contention was that his gun had a weighted trigger he was not familiar/trained well with.

Other than that, does anyone have any actual case law, cases to reference? Until I see actual cases on this topic, it's all speculation to me.

Obviously don't go out and get "smile for bang" etched into your barrel or "kill machine" on your slide - that's just stupid.
 

voodoo_man

Established
The guy out west had something like "Die Motherfucker" on his rifle and it was a bad shoot even without that. The NYPD shooting, I don't remember that angle, just that he essentially fired as a startle response. That's a training issue not a tool issue.

I believe the NYPD stairwell thing was pitched as an "ND" due to the trigger weight, still found guilty because it was still a bad shoot.

I agree that if it's a bad shoot, it's a bad shoot, nothing you can do there. But having anything on the side of your gun and it being a good shoot which was turned into a bad shoot is not something that has occurred as far as I know.

If anyone here knows of such an occurrence please post the info because I'd like to research it.
 

Ryan St.Jean

Regular Member
The only ways I see this being an issue are as follows:
1- The lawyers try to say some stupid punisher symbol, ‘your fucked bro’ writing, etc goes to your mindset.

2- You shoot someone and try to claim a negligent discharge but you messed with a bunch of trigger stuff.

3- You modified a gun in a way not allowed by your department or the military.

Easy solution. Don’t do those things.
 
I try to minimize parts changes, but there are some modifications that just really help overall use. Other than that, I don't really see much point.
 

Kain

Member
As has been beaten to death, if it is a good shoot, it a good shoot, if a bad shoot, well then you are probably boned. That said, until someone can pull out an example where a modifcation that wasn't retarded from the word go boned what would have been an otherwise good shoot I won't care. This is not to say to go retarded and muck with safeties and shit. Or go full retard and do like one shitty shotty I saw that had a rather vulgar racial slur on it followed by eliminator. All that said, I would argue that anyone who is questioned why they were running, say a roland special for example on the stand, the the counterargument could be easily that it is the gun that you shoot the most and the best, and that you wanted the gun that you were most familiar with and most accurate with since you are reasonable for every round fired, so that if, god forbid you had to use it that you should neutralize the threat as quickly and effectivealy as possible while minimizing the possibility for collateral damage due to errant rounds. Then have your defense council play a video of any number of OIS where dozens were fired with few hits. Its a thought at least.
 
Top