Opening a can of Worms - Modified Handguns

[DAVE_M]

I'm hoping this doesn't become a this vs that argument, but rather a thread that could potentially be referenced later on.

Modified Handguns - In the Home vs Carry

This comes up every now and then on the mighty interweb and is almost as ridiculous as the 9mm vs .45 debate, but this is something that not many people touch on. They simply say yes or no.

I've always been told and hear it advocated by instructors & LEO to carry a bone stock handgun, possibly with aftermarket sights. Carrying a stippled Glock with a custom slide, ZEV Trigger, RMR, and X300 could lead to possible legal trouble down the road. I'm curious to know how true this statement is. Now we can't determine how true something is, IF it hasn't happened yet, but we can debate on what's more important: the situation or the firearm.

Scenario 1

Let's say my nightstand gun is a M&P9 with a custom stipple job, apex trigger, TLR-1, and a Trijicon RMR. Let's say a situation occurs that is for sure a self defense case. An intruder breaks into my home, presents a firearm, a shootout occurs, and I luckily make it out alive and have one less BG left in society. How would my modified handgun play out in court?

Scenario 2

Let's say I carry that same gun daily and a self defense situation comes into play. I'm in my vehicle and a car jacker attempts produces a firearm and attempts to steal my vehicle. Again, I luckily make it out alive and there's one less BG.

In both instances, there was a need to defend myself. A firearm was produced and it was either my life or theirs. Should a modified firearm play any part of this? I would assume that aftermarket part manufacturers have to have some sort of liability insurance to prove their parts don't make the firearm unsafe, so I can't see how that could be used against you.

What are your thoughts?

 

[JCcypress]

I don't know of any case in which a "modified" handgun (aftermarket sights, WML, grips, red dot, trigger job, etc.) has had any impact on a self defense case in Louisiana.

 

[JBP55]

Answering the Op. and not JC who I agree with.
If you want legal advice talk to an Attorney well versed in these matters. If you need a name let me know.

 

[ajridgedell]

I have no experience on legal advice for the matter, but in my opinion as long as none of the modifications make the gun unsafe or unreliable it shouldn't make a difference. I have made a few mods to my glock that I believe enhance my ability to operate the gun and I don't worry about my modifications having any impact in court. For me it comes down having confidence that my gun isn't going to accidental discharge when its pointed at my junk (appendix carry). That's the only thing keeping me from doing much trigger work on it.

 

[Request Dust Off]

For clarification: Are you considering criminal and civil liabilities or just criminal?

 

[general mills]

I think it would be situational. With what you are talking about, I would think no. But you wouldn't want Exhibit A to have a back slide cover with a punisher skull that says let the bodies hit the floor. I am no attorney though, just what I think.

 

[Magdump]

I've seen this question/argument before...
Just about the time the déjàvu thing went off in my head I remembered it was about the
AMMO in the gun and not the gun at all...

You can plan for survival. I don't really think you can plan for survival in court, past your choice in attorneys and your public bahavior and "presence" beforehand.

 

[ta2d_cop]

I don't know of any case in which a "modified" handgun (aftermarket sights, WML, grips, red dot, trigger job, etc.) has had any impact on a self defense case in Louisiana.

I agree with this based on my LE experience as it applies to criminal cases. In the shootings I have investigated and been involved in I do not know that anything was looked into further than a forensic firearms examination per ATF standards and protocol. I am not a certified examiner and as such can not provide specifics on said exam. I will say that in my shooting I had a factory Glock 3.5 connector installed and it was never discussed. I would think the FFE is limited to projectile and case matching, and does not involve a detailed disassembly of the subject firearm to examine every part for mods or whatnot.

At the end of the day my thought is if it's a good shoot it doesn't matter if it is with a 22 short or a 500 SW mag. If bad guy rates to be shot, he rates to be shot. Civilly I think, again in my opinion, mods would only be an issue in an accidental or unjustified shoot. That applies for civilian or LEO.

 

[geoney]

If the attorney sees it as an angle, they will most definitely try it. However, it is not something that cannot be easily explained away by a quality expert witness. It is an issue that never becomes a real issue.

 

[DAVE_M]

I don't know of any case in which a "modified" handgun (aftermarket sights, WML, grips, red dot, trigger job, etc.) has had any impact on a self defense case in Louisiana.

Thanks for your input!

Answering the Op. and not JC who I agree with.
If you want legal advice talk to an Attorney well versed in these matters. If you need a name let me know.

Thanks for the offer, but this is strictly hypothetical. An OEM Glock works just fine for me (minus the stock sights). I'm bringing this up due to a conversation I had the other day and after seeing many videos and literature on the subject, it got me wondering. Trusting what you will find on the internet, especially in articles, is often misleading.

I agree with this based on my LE experience as it applies to criminal cases. In the shootings I have investigated and been involved in I do not know that anything was looked into further than a forensic firearms examination per ATF standards and protocol. I am not a certified examiner and as such can not provide specifics on said exam. I will say that in my shooting I had a factory Glock 3.5 connector installed and it was never discussed. I would think the FFE is limited to projectile and case matching, and does not involve a detailed disassembly of the subject firearm to examine every part for mods or whatnot.

At the end of the day my thought is if it's a good shoot it doesn't matter if it is with a 22 short or a 500 SW mag. If bad guy rates to be shot, he rates to be shot. Civilly I think, again in my opinion, mods would only be an issue in an accidental or unjustified shoot. That applies for civilian or LEO.

This is my mindset, but I've had many tell me otherwise. In a justifiable shooting, it should not matter what was used.

 

[Gator 45/70]

I would think nowadays you may consider ''Modified Ammo'' thrown into the equations.

However to date no one has ever been convicted of using reloads or cast bullets.

 

[enutees]

I've heard this stated before. I think it's idiotic. As an example. A local friend of mine shot a guy with his tricked out for competition STI 1911. Not a word was said about the gun. It was a good shoot and that's it.

 

[Kraut]

If you're really worried about perceptions in a courtroom, the things I'd probably avoid are grips with skulls/reapers/Boondock Saints Latin phrases/scrimshaw portraits of Charles Bronson/Confederate flags, etc. and so forth. Things like that probably wouldn't be as big a worry in a criminal matter as they would in a civil case, which to my understanding are more free-for-all/anything goes in what the plaintiff's lawyers are allowed to harp on and go after in portraying the defendant as a raging psychotic paranoid vigilante out to gun down someone just because that evil gun jumped in their hand. I myself think that there's some great looking stuff out there to dress up and personalize a gun, but unfortunately one has to worry about the perception that will be created by some highly paid professional spin doctor with a ready-made audience prepped by the mainstream media well before jury selection. Consider for a second the case in NOLA a couple years back, the white homeowner that shot a black teen who had climbed his security gate and came after him in his driveway. Imagine the additional hoopla if the gun he used had aftermarket grips with a Confederate battle flag. If you defend an old woman you see getting mugged by three thugs and your gun has those Latin words mimicking the tattoos from The Boondock Saints, the plaintiff's lawyer will be all over the vigilante angle. I am legitimately a direct descendant of a Confederate veteran, but if I choose to celebrate that by joining SCV and putting a sticker or license plate on my vehicle, then end up in the line of duty having to shoot someone who is black, as ridiculous as it is, the can of worms will be opened and I will have to fight doubly hard because not just the plaintiff's lawyer but the media well in advance will seize upon something like that for sensationalism and ratings. In a perfect world, stuff like that wouldn't matter, but we all know better than that.

 

[Vigilante Sniper]

Same situation as applied to ammo chosen for defense. Massad Ayoob always advocated carrying factory ammo in your self defense gun because in court ( Civil or Criminal) a lawyer may say "oh factory ammo wasn't good enough for Mr shooter to shoot his client, he had to make his own "Man KIller Bullets" for the jurors to hear". That statement has always resonated in my mind since I read that article over 20 years ago. Mr Ayoob is an expert witness in many shooting cases and I've always respected what he had to say about self defense scenarios. Plan ahead for the civil action that will undoubtedly occur even if the shoot is justified. Also don't carry your $5K custom 1911 that may sit in a police evidence room for a year or so and you get back full of rust.

 

[Gator 45/70]

Sound advice!

Same situation as applied to ammo chosen for defense. Massad Ayoob always advocated carrying factory ammo in your self defense gun because in court ( Civil or Criminal) a lawyer may say "oh factory ammo wasn't good enough for Mr shooter to shoot his client, he had to make his own "Man KIller Bullets" for the jurors to hear". That statement has always resonated in my mind since I read that article over 20 years ago. Mr Ayoob is an expert witness in many shooting cases and I've always respected what he had to say about self defense scenarios. Plan ahead for the civil action that will undoubtedly occur even if the shoot is justified. Also don't carry your $5K custom 1911 that may sit in a police evidence room for a year or so and you get back full of rust.

 

[DAVE_M]

Thanks for everyone's replies and input!

 

[highstandard40]

Lawyers are going to make arguments for their clients and logic often goes out the window when they do so. I have never understood how the ammo you use should "logically" even be considered in a defensive shooting situation. If you are of the opinion stated by Mr. Ayoob then you would also have to agree that the caliber of your defensive weapon should likewise be considered. I can hear the lawyer right now making the argument ........."Mr "so and so' clearly had blood lust in mind when he shot my poor client with his 45ACP, which is clearly designed to kill, when all he really needed to defend himself was a 22".

A lawyer will find a way to exhibit a way to cast you in an evil light, I don't care what gun or ammo that you use.

 

[bayoupirate]

Just had this conversation with a co-worker. I have no doubt that membership in any Shooting Club, Association, and especially IDPA or USPSA/IPSC, is an angle that the opposition would bring into play. I would fully expect that videos, photos, awards, your classification and examples of stages simulating shooting human-shaped silhouettes, would all be spun as training to kill people.

 

[kingfhb]

I have heard for years that "Attorneys MAY do this..." and "Attorneys MAY do that...", but I have YET to see a case anywhere in the country that played out against the shooter because he/she was using a weapon that had been "modified", upgraded, or otherwise. If these attorneys (and I know PLENTY of them) are so good at what they do, and they thought it would help their case, WHY HASN'T IT BEEN SUCCESSFULLY DONE YET?????

The argument has been made... several times, however, it has never played out against the shooter. There are too many variables that could be used and would never allow the complaint to stick.

1. The purchase of a used weapon where modifications have been made. It could be your first weapon, therefore you would never know any difference from a factory setup as opposed to a "modified" setup for that weapon.

2. Several Firearm manufacturers have begun releasing PRE-modified firearms or even licensing third party vendors to modify them for sale. (ie. "CUSTOM SHOP" firearm modifications).

3. As long as the modifications do not put the firearm in the realm of "unsafe", and the party selling the part have the authority to do so, the argument can be made that those parts are designed to work safely in that firearm and does not change its use.

4. Factory modifications (ie. a 3.5lb trigger bar in a Glock from the factory) or parts sold from the factory that allow for the modification of the firearm are available for that firearm pre or post purchase. I have purchased Glock 30s's that have come with 3.5# triggers and then had others that have had higher triggers when they purchased the same weapon. (+/-/.)

5. The same argument could be made for single action or double action pistols. Or even purchasing one handgun over another. "Why did you specifically choose that weapon to carry over another?" (modified or not)... or "Why did you choose that particular ammunition over everything else?"

6. How about AR-15 builds? If you build it up yourself... put your own trigger in it or anything else... what about adding a flashlight? A laser? A lighter handguard as opposed to an A2 setup? A Magpul Stock? Or even getting deeper, like choosing a K2 grip over a MOE grip?

7. If you load your own ammo... why did you choose that powder? Why that projectile? why that primer? etc.

8. What about accessories? Grips? Sights? Finger Extensions? Extended Magazines? ANY AND ALL Aftermarket parts for that matter. Ghost and NDS Performance would be out of business in no time.

9. What training you've taken... how often you practice... etc... etc... etc.

10. What about... "why do you have that punisher slug plug on your Glock?"... "why do you have "Kill them all and let god sort them out" on your AR receiver?... "why does your safety selector say "SAFE, and DEAD" instead of "SAFE, and UNSAFE"?

11. Some attorneys even say "If you want a lighter trigger pull, get a different gun"... but what if even that is called into question? So you modified the type of weapon you carry to be a better killer instead of just the parts inside?

As I said, literally ANYTHING can be called into question... the fact that you even choose to carry could be called into question... they can paint a picture of someone who was just out for blood, but its up to YOUR attorney to squash that.

Most if not all cases regarding modified weapons are things like negligent discharges, "accidents", police officers that have modified their weapons outside departmental specs, etc.

No Self Defense case has ever been decided based on the modifications to the firearm to the best of my knowledge.

 

[pyreaux]

If you're curious about try to research case law, not Internet opinion or rumor. If someone is arguing with you the I would request they short court documentation showing an example case.