Modified or non-stock carry handguns

[packingvol]

Something got me thinking about this the other day, maybe sparked by casual readings regarding the debate on modifying components in handguns. The old "modified the trigger" in potential civil suits regarding defensive shootings. I know this trigger issue has been argued ad nauseum, but somehow it got me thinking about the barrel swap in my daily carry. I carry a G27 with an aftermarket 357 SIG barrel in it.

This isn't intended to spark a caliber debate, but is there any reason to have concern carrying a modified pistol as such, considering some of the arguments presented in the modified trigger debate? I know it sounds silly, but if it can be avoided...

[Guest Scramasax]

I think Mas was the first one to broach this subject. It just gives the lawyers more grist for the mill in a court case. They will use any avenue to win. There again I'm not wanting to start a bottom feeder debait. Lets stick to the facts. Any modification/caliber that is done to a firearm used in a shooting is possibly going to come up mainly in a civil case. All you have to do is justify your choice with logic. i.e. This is the caliber that was chosen by le for issue due to it's effectiveness to protect thier and the publics life. I had the trigger altered so I would have more control of not accidentally shooting because of my arthritis. The last thing I want to do is shoot somebody. He/she was threatening my life. It was the only way I could protect myself.

I know alittle off your original question and remember it's just my opinion.

Cheers,

tad

[Guest tnxdshooter]

Something got me thinking about this the other day, maybe sparked by casual readings regarding the debate on modifying components in handguns. The old "modified the trigger" in potential civil suits regarding defensive shootings. I know this trigger issue has been argued ad nauseum, but somehow it got me thinking about the barrel swap in my daily carry. I carry a G27 with an aftermarket 357 SIG barrel in it.

This isn't intended to spark a caliber debate, but is there any reason to have concern carrying a modified pistol as such, considering some of the arguments presented in the modified trigger debate? I know it sounds silly, but if it can be avoided...

I have had a combat trigger job with internal over travel adjustment done on my xd 40 making the trigger about 4 pounds or so and really smooth with a short reset. Also, I have had the barrel refitted for match grade accuracy. As far as my 1911 goes the only thing I have really done thus far was to change out the ambi safety that came on the gun with a shorter wilson combat tactical ambi safety. I dont really think the cops are going to know nor is the da that I have had that done to my xd UNLESS I STUPIDLY TELL THEM which I already know you tell them nothing without an attorney present. I dont see it being an issue really. Here soon just as soon as I find me some more employment i plan on getting a wilson combat ultra light hammer, ultralight speed trigger, and deluxe bullet proof a2 sear with stainless disconnector, and stainless plunger, as well as a wilson combat extended slide release.

Edited October 27, 2010 by tnxdshooter

[Guest 6.8 AR]

If there was a law saying you couldn't modify a trigger or change a spring in a pistol

to make it shoot or recoil better, quite a few of us and the firearms industry would be

law breakers.

[Backon4]

Is it worth giving them another reason to play the vigilante card. I have spoken to my local DA, a friend of the family, and he has no issues with it. However he said he should be the least of your worries. He said in a civil case any attorney is going to try to find every reason to nail you to the wall. And because there doesn't have to be a consensus you had better expect to have it go against you and have to pay through the nose. He carries and old police .38 special with basic walmart ammo just for that reason.

[packingvol]

Is it worth giving them another reason to play the vigilante card. I have spoken to my local DA, a friend of the family, and he has no issues with it. However he said he should be the least of your worries. He said in a civil case any attorney is going to try to find every reason to nail you to the wall. And because there doesn't have to be a consensus you had better expect to have it go against you and have to pay through the nose. He carries and old police .38 special with basic walmart ammo just for that reason.

That's pretty much what I was leaning towards when I got to thinking about this. My biggest concern was that my carry pistol is designated 40 caliber (G27) but I've installed a barrel to shoot 357 SIG, a fact that would be a lot easier to pick up on in a report as opposed to any internal modifications. Obviously trigger modifications would be difficult to detect, and probably never even considered unless otherwise mentioned. Given the line of logic presented for these types of civil cases, it wouldn't be hard for plaintiff's lawyer to argue the cartridge had been "upgraded" or some such thing to make the weapon more destructive, etc.

Whereas I could always just simply go find me a G33 and carry a stock 357 SIG glock, no modifications or alternations to otherwise pick apart in a report. Plenty of police agency's use the cartridge, so I doubt that point has much arguable validity.

I'm less concerned about ammo selection. I figure that a hollow point is a hollow point, and if police agency's use it, AND it can be purchased on the civilian market, then it is good to go. This has, in fact, got me thinking about the Rangers I carry as well...

[dats82]

Don't ask, don't tell applies to more than just gays. You should never volunteer any info like that, and depending on who asks, a little white lie never hurt nobody.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Why would that make any difference, if the caliber is used in a different gun,

and is compatible with the gun you would be carrying? Also, if the caliber is

found in other weapons, where does destructability enter into this?

Not being a lawyer, I think one might try to sway a jury with some kind of emotional

argument, but a decent defense lawyer should be able to shred that argument,

shouldn't they? Of course, that kind of thing shouldn't get that far, to begin with.

[Patton]

I know you would carry that 27w/357sig barrel everywhere, but I have heard off several self defense shootings be questioned in other states about the weapon/caliber choice. It has always looked great to a jury when the weapon used is that of the local law enforcement. TN would be one of the last states I would think a modified weapon used would hurt your case. Just have a great explanation on why you use what you use. It's a caliber specifically designed for Law Enforcement/Security/Protective Service use.

[TGO David]

Here are my honest thoughts on theories like this that get presented by well know gun-rag celebrities:

I have a lot of respect for Ayoob and others like him, however they ultimately are paid for their submissions to these various magazines. After a while one (or at least I do) must begin to wonder how much of what they present amounts to personal hypothesis for the sake of generating a word-count to occupy space in a magazine or on a web site to generate revenue.

Sure, I can see where an attorney might try to use your Glock's Ghost connector against you, or your choice of ammo, or your choice of sights, etc. But I can also see where as long as it was justifiable self-defense devoid of gray areas (i.e. a "clean shoot") that they can argue this stuff til the cows come home and it really won't matter much in their favor. Were an intruder to break into my home and attempt to do harm to me or my family and the only thing I had to defend myself with was a camping axe, would the implement used really matter?

Oh, I'm sure some sniveling little reporter would try to sensationalize my use of an axe ... but ultimately it would be a clear cut [no pun intended] case of self defense and I would have been well within the law to defend myself with whatever I had at hand.

A handgun is simply a more efficient means of restoring a balance of power between an aggressor and the victim. I'm not a lawyer, but I really don't think it would matter a bit if you had augmented your control over a handgun with better sights, a smoother trigger, etc. or chose ammunition with superior ballistics.

Just my $0.02 worth.

[Fallguy]

....and I think that about sums it up...

[mikegideon]

I think the argument is simple, if you have to make it. I shoot my gun all the time at the range. I carry it as well, but anything I have done to it was to improve my shooting experience at the range. In my case, it's the truth.

[Guest tnxdshooter]

I know you would carry that 27w/357sig barrel everywhere, but I have heard off several self defense shootings be questioned in other states about the weapon/caliber choice. It has always looked great to a jury when the weapon used is that of the local law enforcement. TN would be one of the last states I would think a modified weapon used would hurt your case. Just have a great explanation on why you use what you use. It's a caliber specifically designed for Law Enforcement/Security/Protective Service use.

Right and alot of PD and such are going 357 sig now due to geater penetration than the 40.

[Backon4]

I am not worried about a criminal suit if I need o use my firearm. Even if it is ruled justified you can still expect to be sued in civil court. How hard do you think it is going to be for a lawyer to persuade a bunch of gun ignorant people that you could have done something else, used something else, or been carrying something else. For me I am not taking any chances or giving anyone any reason to question my motives.

[Fallguy]

I am not worried about a criminal suit if I need o use my firearm. Even if it is ruled justified you can still expect to be sued in civil court. How hard do you think it is going to be for a lawyer to persuade a bunch of gun ignorant people that you could have done something else, used something else, or been carrying something else. For me I am not taking any chances or giving anyone any reason to question my motives.

Are you famillar with T.C.A. 39-11-622? See http://www.michie.com/tennessee

While no one should ignore the chance of a civil suit....if one is overly worried about being sued for the use of a firearm, carrying one and maybe even owning one isn't the thing to do. At least make peace with the idea you could be sued, so you're not thinking about it at the moment of truth....

[packingvol]

I know you would carry that 27w/357sig barrel everywhere, but I have heard off several self defense shootings be questioned in other states about the weapon/caliber choice. It has always looked great to a jury when the weapon used is that of the local law enforcement. TN would be one of the last states I would think a modified weapon used would hurt your case. Just have a great explanation on why you use what you use. It's a caliber specifically designed for Law Enforcement/Security/Protective Service use.

Here is something else to consider... what, if any difference would it make in a civil suit defense if the weapon used is purchased through FFL, or purchased via straw sale? Everyone assumes there would be no issue since the law clearly allows for straw sale of handguns between citizens without registration, assuming the criteria for straw sale are met. Is this another potential can of worms if you're trying to defend yourself against the inevitable civil suit? Is the answer to only utilize from unmodified factory handguns purchased through FFL? I'm only suggesting that some jury's may be sympathetic to the "unregistered handgun" argument, if there is one to be made. Thoughts?

[Fallguy]

Here is something else to consider... what, if any difference would it make in a civil suit defense if the weapon used is purchased through FFL, or purchased via straw sale? Everyone assumes there would be no issue since the law clearly allows for straw sale of handguns between citizens without registration, assuming the criteria for straw sale are met. Is this another potential can of worms if you're trying to defend yourself against the inevitable civil suit? Is the answer to only utilize from unmodified factory handguns purchased through FFL? I'm only suggesting that some jury's may be sympathetic to the "unregistered handgun" argument, if there is one to be made. Thoughts?

Thoughts....well....

Private sale does not equal straw sale. A straw purchase is purchasing a firearm for someone you know can not legally purchase one themselves and then selling/giving it to them.

There is not "registration" when purchasing a firearm from a FFL. Yes there is a record of the sale, but the gun is not registered.

As I said above, if someone is this worried about being sued, they probably shouldn't have a firearm.

[packingvol]

Thoughts....well....

Private sale does not equal straw sale. A straw purchase is purchasing a firearm for someone you know can not legally purchase one themselves and then selling/giving it to them.

There is not "registration" when purchasing a firearm from a FFL. Yes there is a record of the sale, but the gun is not registered.

As I said above, if someone is this worried about being sued, they probably shouldn't have a firearm.

Thanks for clearing that up. I was mistaken in the use of "straw sale," you understood what I was getting at.

I'm not worried about being sued, just thinking over factors that can make the process more or less painful.

[Guest carbonarcher]

Sorry guys, being once bitten twice shy! I know that this doesn't apply hear! Maybe some insight! My brother inlaw is a patent attorney, West Point grad. We both grew up in North Jersey,(I know!) We have had this debate over and over again! I don't know if you all know what it takes to be a patent lawer, (I didn't) graduating from West Point with a degree in electrical engenerring, then law school, and then patent law. He also worked with Glock to help other companys from copying there patent, going back I think it may have been S&W with the sigma. (If my memory serves) He knew that I was a far right wing guy who competed with 1911's he always said, "Don't use a pistol that you modified for competition for self defense!" He told me that the trial sharks will have a field day with that, even if you were in the right!

Then I questioned- "Why did you modify your pistol?" "Were you looking to get into a confrentation?" "Where you looking for someone to break into your house, or threaten you? So you could "Get them" ?

After that, He reminded me that the majority of trial sharks are left wing libs. looking to get a civial suit to get all kind of money, hense What was his name from South Carolina who cheated on his wife with cancer? John.....? He also reminded me that you may have been right in your defense of your self and your family, all it takes is one shred for the shark to blow out of the water to get you for the rest of your life, even if you were in the right!

I had another debate about the ammo! Hollow point or polymer filled tip?

Go with the filled tip, I use Power ball! Again as he said, in the court of law, why did you use a hollow point? Were you looking to kill some one?

As his studies have been stated, he testified that the polymer tiped ammo are the best on the market!

1. Shark can't call them a hollow point!

2. They work better, especially with heavy clothing!

3. Power ball and glasers are made to dump all there energy into a wall or something. So that they can not penitrate a wall and hit someone else.

This establishes that you are safety concerened!

Ok!

Keep it Stock! Keep you comp guns for play! Don't carry them! You may be right in the court with criminal charges, not with civial suits!!

Ok, my 2 cents and off the soap box!

Sorry for the rant!

I would hate to see anything happen to a good person doing the right thing and a money hungery shark comes along and takes everything away, because you had a trigger job!

[TGO David]

Carbon, no offense but everything you argued is purely anecdotal and borders on urban legend. I think you or I either one would have a hard time finding evidence of this sort of tactic being used with success in a court of law when the shooter was justified.

Frankly these types of things strike me as being Chicken Little arguments against even owning a gun. If you modify it for better accuracy or reliability, you were looking to kill someone. If you use hollow-point instead of FMJ, you were looking to kill someone. If you carry a semi-automatic instead of a revolver, you were looking to kill someone.

Bottom line is none of us are looking to kill anyone. We want to be left alone and we want to be able to protect ourselves and our families from the predators who seek to take what is precious away from us. If I was looking to kill someone, I'd have no problem doing it with any manner of device -- baseball bat, brick, hammer, screwdriver, knife, icepick... my bare hands.

I hear what you're saying about these Liberal activist judges and attorneys looking to make a name for themselves and looking to twist the world into their vision of what it should be, but those guys are going to go after you even if you happen to fall asleep behind the wheel and run over someone's dog.

Those vermin want you to reconsider being armed for your self-preservation because they don't want you armed in the first place.

Again, my $0.02.

[Guest carbonarcher]

Trust me, I am not reconsidering. I am ensuring that I am leaving no avenue to have a civial suit. Like you agreed, the left wing sharks looking to make a name for themselves would do everything that they could to do so. I am no officer of the court, and this is in no way shape or form keeping me from my second ammend. rights. Trust me on that. I am just adding in my two cents. I think chicken little is a little extreme. Quite the other way, great thing out there that you don't leave your self exposed. I apologize if I was taken the wrong way, I am a hard core right winger. I just won't leave myself open....

Just sharing an opionion, nothing more then that. THANK GOD FOR TGO!! LOL

[Fallguy]

If you do not want to leave any avenue for a civil suit....don't own or use a firearm.

However there is still a chance you could be sued.....if you live that is.

Your best defense in a civil suit is going to be that you had a reasonable fear of imminent death or serious bodily harm..... If that argument doesn't satisfy the jury, then I don't think it would matter what weapon you used or how it may have been modified.

[Guest carbonarcher]

Agreed!

I will say that the second reason why I left the Great Republic of New Jersey was in you statement. Trying go get us not to have firearms. LOL! If you know those laws and what it takes to purchase a pistol in NJ, You would call me a patriot. LOL.

Now I am a PROUD RESIDENT OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE, so I don't have to worry about that stuff anymore. I am greatful for your insight! You have helped to shed new light on the subject. So Fallguy, I say Thank you.

I am very greatful for having the chance to talk with you!

Thanks

[Fallguy]

Here is the text of the law I mentioned above.

While it doesn't prevent someone from filing a civil suit......if a criminal court has already ruled it a justified shoot...they have a very tough row to hoe...

39-11-622. Justification for use of force — Exceptions — Immunity from civil liability.

(a) (1) A person who uses force as permitted in §§ 39-11-611 — 39-11-614 or § 29-34-201, is justified in using such force and is immune from civil liability for the use of such force, unless:

(A)

The person against whom force was used is a law enforcement officer, as defined in § 39-11-106 who:

(i)

Was acting in the performance of the officer's official duties; and

(ii)

Identified the officer in accordance with any applicable law; or

(iii)

The person using force knew or reasonably should have known that the person was a law enforcement officer; or

(

The force used by the person resulted in property damage to or the death or injury of an innocent bystander or other person against whom the force used was not justified.

( The court shall award reasonable attorney's fees, court costs, compensation for loss of income, and all expenses incurred by a person in defense of any civil action brought against the person based upon the person's use of force, if the court finds that the defendant was justified in using such force pursuant to §§ 39-11-611 — 39-11-614 or § 29-34-201.

.....and congrats on getting out of Jersey...

[Guest carbonarcher]

Thanks Fallguy! I am greatful! I just choose to do my own thing. I choose to not be cross examined and asked those kind of questions.

I agree absolutely with what you are saying! Whole heartedly! I come from a culture of lefties and will do what I can to get the "best" and not be crisified for it. We all know what the law says. Yes I agree, how it is presented to a jury is another story.

Thank you for the debate. although I agree with you!

Have you looked up the laws in NJ and see what it took to get a pistol?

Again, I will say it again, I AGREE WITH YOU!!!!! I AGREE WITH YOU!!!!!!!

I hope you go after libs like this? LOL