Justified shooting w/ modified weapon?

[terryg]

Does anybody think there could be potential legal issues if you were involved in an otherwise 100% justified shooting while using a weapon in which you had self modified some portion - especially a 'safety' feature?

I am considering whether on not to remove the magazine disconnect on my new SR9c. I understand the potential warranty issues involved. But I was wondering if I might somehow be placing myself in greater legal jeopardy if I was ever required to use the modified gun in a self defense situation - even if that modification had no bearing on the shooting incident. Any thoughts?

[Purplehood]

Does anybody think there could be potential legal issues if you were involved in an otherwise 100% justified shooting while using a weapon in which you had self modified some portion - especially a 'safety' feature?

I am considering whether on not to remove the magazine disconnect on my new SR9c. I understand the potential warranty issues involved. But I was wondering if I might somehow be placing myself in greater legal jeopardy if I was ever required to use the modified gun in a self defense situation - even if that modification had no bearing on the shooting incident. Any thoughts?

The only issue I could imagine is the Feds becoming aware of a weapon that required a tax-tag (I have no idea what the proper term is) to own, and didn't have one. Other than that, shooting someone with one thing over another shouldn't make any material difference.

[PUCKER]

I'm not even going to try to play lawyer - but my simple mind says this - if you are justified in using deadly force against the perp then it doesn't matter what the weapon was - ie hand, knee, elbow, bat, golf club, mace, sword, pistol, shotgun, rifle, Jeep, truck, knife, rolling pin, frying pan, legally-owned full-auto machine gun, legally-owned suppressed pistol, legally-owned SBR, etc....but that's just my opinion.

One thing that I would worry about if I used an NFA-type of weapon (machine gun, suppressed weapon, SBR, etc) is that it would be gathered as evidence until final disposition (which I'm sure any other type of weapon would be as well)...that's some high-dollar stuff, just throwing that out there.

[A-R]

My response to same/similar question in another thread below ...

posting.php?mode=quote&f=53&p=443484" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

RE: hair triggers and prosecutors

As it specifically relates to the OP's question of semi-auto vs. revolver, I tend not to worry about such things if I ever find myself staring down the gavel from a judge's bench. Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6 and all that.

But more importantly, I think most of these "prosecutor's tricks" can be easily countered with sound arguments (of course IANAL so what do I know about such things?)

A trigger that FEELS RIGHT to the shooter and helps the shooter shoot their weapon more accurately is always a good thing in my book. Obviously, as with anything, you can go "too far" with this thinking. A 1911 competition gun with a true "hair trigger" is not a good idea for carrying purposes.

Prosecutor: "Why did you intall that hair trigger on your gun. Isn't that dangerous? You were hoping to kill someone weren't you?"
Me: "No sir/ma'am, I was hoping to hit what I was aiming at - and only what I was aiming at - so that I would not injure or kill innocent bystanders. I customized my Glock with a 3.5-pound trigger connector because with constant range practice I realized that gave me the best chance possible to hit my target if, God forbid, I ever had to use my weapon in self-defense, which is what happened on the day in question."

Now apply the same scenario to hollow point bullets, which as we all "know" serve only one purpose - "to kill human beings"

Prosecutor: "You loaded your weapon with Acme Jacketed Razor Talon Hollow Point Man Killer bullets because you wanted to KILL someone, didn't you?"
Me: "No sir/ma'am, I loaded my weapon with hollow point bullets because numerous studies I've read and amateur testing I've conducted myself show they are less likely to overpenetrate a body and cause risk to innocent bystanders, they are more effective at more quickly incapacitating an attacking person or animal - thus stopping or neutralizing the threat to my physical safety, and because most law enforcement officers carry the same or similar ammunition in their weapons for the same or similar reasons"

Of course, the way lawyers work, there's a good chance I'd never be allowed on the stand in the first place. But my point is, a prosecutor's "tricks" would seem to be easily countered in court with sound reasoning, scientific evidence, expert testimony, etc.

Long story short (too late) ... I don't worry that a prosecutor may use a particular aspect of my carry gun against me. If my gun and ammo are legal and I only shot the person who was threatening me with reasonable fear of immediate serious physical injury or death and did not miss and hit an innocent bystander or someone else's property, then I'll take my chances with idiot prosecutors underhanded tricks.

[terryg]

My response to same/similar question in another thread below ...

posting.php?mode=quote&f=53&p=443484" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

RE: hair triggers and prosecutors

As it specifically relates to the OP's question of semi-auto vs. revolver, I tend not to worry about such things if I ever find myself staring down the gavel from a judge's bench. Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6 and all that.

But more importantly, I think most of these "prosecutor's tricks" can be easily countered with sound arguments (of course IANAL so what do I know about such things?)

A trigger that FEELS RIGHT to the shooter and helps the shooter shoot their weapon more accurately is always a good thing in my book. Obviously, as with anything, you can go "too far" with this thinking. A 1911 competition gun with a true "hair trigger" is not a good idea for carrying purposes.

Prosecutor: "Why did you intall that hair trigger on your gun. Isn't that dangerous? You were hoping to kill someone weren't you?"
Me: "No sir/ma'am, I was hoping to hit what I was aiming at - and only what I was aiming at - so that I would not injure or kill innocent bystanders. I customized my Glock with a 3.5-pound trigger connector because with constant range practice I realized that gave me the best chance possible to hit my target if, God forbid, I ever had to use my weapon in self-defense, which is what happened on the day in question."

Now apply the same scenario to hollow point bullets, which as we all "know" serve only one purpose - "to kill human beings"

Prosecutor: "You loaded your weapon with Acme Jacketed Razor Talon Hollow Point Man Killer bullets because you wanted to KILL someone, didn't you?"
Me: "No sir/ma'am, I loaded my weapon with hollow point bullets because numerous studies I've read and amateur testing I've conducted myself show they are less likely to overpenetrate a body and cause risk to innocent bystanders, they are more effective at more quickly incapacitating an attacking person or animal - thus stopping or neutralizing the threat to my physical safety, and because most law enforcement officers carry the same or similar ammunition in their weapons for the same or similar reasons"

Of course, the way lawyers work, there's a good chance I'd never be allowed on the stand in the first place. But my point is, a prosecutor's "tricks" would seem to be easily countered in court with sound reasoning, scientific evidence, expert testimony, etc.

Long story short (too late) ... I don't worry that a prosecutor may use a particular aspect of my carry gun against me. If my gun and ammo are legal and I only shot the person who was threatening me with reasonable fear of immediate serious physical injury or death and did not miss and hit an innocent bystander or someone else's property, then I'll take my chances with idiot prosecutors underhanded tricks.

Excellent quote, thank you. I was thinking along the same lines. "You removed a manufacturer installed safety feature of you weapon. Are you a gun-smith? Do you like the idea of carrying an 'un-safe' weapon?"

[A-R]

Excellent quote, thank you. I was thinking along the same lines. "You removed a manufacturer installed safety feature of you weapon. Are you a gun-smith? Do you like the idea of carrying an 'un-safe' weapon?"

"Well sir, since I used my weapon to shoot the bad guy, didn't shoot any innocent bystanders, other property, or myself - I'd say my weapon is very safe - it only shot what I intended it to shoot."

[gigag04]

if you are justified in using deadly force against the perp then it doesn't matter what the weapon was - ie hand, knee, elbow, bat, golf club, mace, sword, pistol, shotgun, rifle, Jeep, truck, knife, rolling pin, frying pan, legally-owned full-auto machine gun, legally-owned suppressed pistol, legally-owned SBR, etc

This

[PUCKER]

if you are justified in using deadly force against the perp then it doesn't matter what the weapon was - ie hand, knee, elbow, bat, golf club, mace, sword, pistol, shotgun, rifle, Jeep, truck, knife, rolling pin, frying pan, legally-owned full-auto machine gun, legally-owned suppressed pistol, legally-owned SBR, etc

This

[terryg]

if you are justified in using deadly force against the perp then it doesn't matter what the weapon was - ie hand, knee, elbow, bat, golf club, mace, sword, pistol, shotgun, rifle, Jeep, truck, knife, rolling pin, frying pan, legally-owned full-auto machine gun, legally-owned suppressed pistol, legally-owned SBR, etc

This

I think he meant to say "This OP is totally awesome!"

[G.A. Heath]

I don't think it would matter in a justified shooting, but in the event of a negligent discharge or questionable shooting it could make a difference.

[ghostrider]

I am considering whether on not to remove the magazine disconnect on my new SR9c

Its not something I would lose sleep over. In my opinion magazine disconnects (thank you for not calling it a 'safety') are a crutch and encourage bad gun handling practices. I remove them from Browning hi-powers.

[The Annoyed Man]

I am considering whether on not to remove the magazine disconnect on my new SR9c

Its not something I would lose sleep over. In my opinion magazine disconnects (thank you for not calling it a 'safety') are a crutch and encourage bad gun handling practices. I remove them from Browning hi-powers.

I have the opposite problem....

My M&P 45 has imprinted onto the black slide in high contrast lettering the following legend: "CAUTION-CAPABLE OF FIRING WITH MAGAZINE REMOVED"

The fact that it will do that doesn't bother me at all, because all my pistols are like that. I just wish that lettering weren't there, but I don't want to risk damage to the slide's finish to try and remove it.

[terryg]

(thank you for not calling it a 'safety')

That 'feature' is one of the few negatives about this handgun. It almost made the decision for me to not go with it. But I was very happy to see that is is very easily removed. (It can also go right back in - in case it needs to go back to Ruger).

I suppose it is arguable that if the gun was being wrested from your hands, you could (somehow) hit the mag release button making the weapon in-operable. But I think if the encounter gets to that point, I have probably already lost. If he is strong enough to wrest it from my hands, then he is strong enough to beat me with it (and it ought to be completely emptied by that point anyway).

The only real safety feature provided by the disconnect is so an owner doesn't shoot him/her self while cleaning because they forgot there was a round in the chamber - and it even has a chambered round indicator!!!

If anything, i think it is an 'anti-safety' feature for the user. The most optimal time for a magazine change is after the last round of the current magazine is chambered, but before it is fired. But if in the middle of the mag change when my adrenaline is pumping, I am shaking and drop the mag and the BG sees this and rushes me - I want to be able to fire that round!! (That's assuming I remember to count my shots anyway! )

-----

Plus, you never know when you might have to pull a Denzel Washington in Deja Vu. He pretended to come out 'unarmed' by dropping the mag from his weapon and with the slide open, put one round in the pipe while letting it dangle from one of his fingers. This made the BG think it empty - then when the moment presented itself, he closed the slide and fired one head shot!

[mgood]

If anything, i think it is an 'anti-safety' feature for the user. The most optimal time for a magazine change is after the last round of the current magazine is chambered, but before it is fired. But if in the middle of the mag change when my adrenaline is pumping, I am shaking and drop the mag and the BG sees this and rushes me - I want to be able to fire that round!!

For the most part, I don't care if a pistol has a magazine disconnect or not. I prefer that it does not. I don't need it. And I just might want to fire the danged thing without a magazine inserted.

True story:
I was shooting in a local USPSA match. I thought I had finished the course of fire, but I usually look around at the end to see if I've overlooked something I was supposed to shoot. (Becuase that's burned me more than once.) I had already ejected the magazine when I spotted a target without the requisite number of holes in it. I'm standing there with my pistol in my right hand and the mag in my left. I realize there's still a round in the chamber, extend my arm, and put another hole in that target.
When you're done with a match stage, the command from the Range Officer is "If you are finished, unload and show clear."
That day it was like, "If you are . . . " *BANG!* " . . . IF YOU ARE FINISHED, unload and show clear!"