After market parts

Diver43 · February 2016

We have all heard the war stories about anti gun or over zealous prosecutors going after the victin of a bad guy in a justifiable shoot. Don't use reloads etc. But what about after market triggers, removing magazine disconnects, upgraded springs and such? The list of what can be done to a HD AR are endless. Do people worry for no reason or is it a legitimate concern?

Bigslug · February 2016

What is the benefit of the part in question? Why didn't the manufacturer install it in the first place? Is the original state of the gun such that it requires it, or are you merely making the upgrade to use as a crutch for your own crappy shooting technique? Is the benefit gained from the part REALLY going to help you in a defensive shooting, or are you merely on an anal retentive quest to shrink your groups by a half inch? If your gun quits working at the moment of truth, will the manufacturer of both the gun and the AM part be able to shrug and say "It wasn't anything WE did to make that gun quit"?

Never mind the lawyers. How much of this CRAP actually helps the gun run better? Most of it doesn't, and a lot of trigger upgrades can compromise reliability, safety, or both.

I'm not saying "don't do it". I'm saying, "look REALLY hard at WHY you're doing it", and be able to explain it in a more articulate way than "the glossy magazine ad made me drool".

bisley · February 2016

It is my opinion that the narrative about anti-gun prosecutors niggling away at the details to trap the actual victim who has successfully defended himself are overblown and taken out of context. These narratives always assume that the victim's lawyer is going to be an idiot that had no clue that his opponent would try to change who is actually on trial. For such a tack to actually succeed, a jury like the one in the OJ Simpson trial has to be impaneled, in which case, all bets are off, anyway.

The fact that a person has prepared carefully for the likelihood of having to fight for his life does not change the actual facts, unless the system is completely turned upside down and subject to a media circus. Yes, it can happen, and it is more likely to happen some places than others. But if a person believes that a tweak or two on his weapon or ammo makes him more likely to be successful in a fight for his life, he should take advantage and survive. As far as I can tell, any time the actual equipment used comes into play, it is used to add a small amount of extra weight to some other, more compelling evidence of wrongdoing.

Teach · February 2016

Wouldn't it be simpler just to refuse to live somewhere that prosecutors and/or civil suit juries would be susceptible to those kinds of arguments? I can't imagine that sort of situation happening anywhere but a commiecrap-controlled environment like Noo Yawk or Chiraq, for instance!
Jerry

snake284 · February 2016

Of course I'm in Texas and less likely to have problems, but I say fix that gun like you want it if you think it will help how your gun runs (only IF you're sure it won't make your gun unreliable). The better it runs, the better you will shoot it, and the better chance you have of surviving a life threatening altercation. Better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6.

(Edited to add darkend part.)

snake284 · February 2016

Teach wrote: »

Wouldn't it be simpler just to refuse to live somewhere that prosecutors and/or civil suit juries would be susceptible to those kinds of arguments? I can't imagine that sort of situation happening anywhere but a commiecrap-controlled environment like Noo Yawk or Chiraq, for instance!
Jerry

:that:

Iffin you live in a Crap Hole like that, by all means come to a place that still believes in Liberty!

bisley · February 2016

Teach wrote: »

Wouldn't it be simpler just to refuse to live somewhere that prosecutors and/or civil suit juries would be susceptible to those kinds of arguments? I can't imagine that sort of situation happening anywhere but a commiecrap-controlled environment like Noo Yawk or Chiraq, for instance!
Jerry

I've already done that. I'm just saying that there is little to no compelling evidence that lawyers win by attacking the equipment being used by the good guy, when all the rest of the evidence supports his story...wherever it happens.

Teach · February 2016

Having a brother who makes his living defending the scum of society, I've gotten a pretty good perspective on both sides of the criminal "justice" system. Lawyers are a bunch of sleazeball bottom-feeders, no matter which side of the courtroom they inhabit. If anything, prosecutors are more likely to engage in dirty tricks than the defense, just because they have a better chance of getting away with it!
Jerry

snake284 · February 2016

bisley wrote: »

It is my opinion that the narrative about anti-gun prosecutors niggling away at the details to trap the actual victim who has successfully defended himself are overblown and taken out of context. These narratives always assume that the victim's lawyer is going to be an idiot that had no clue that his opponent would try to change who is actually on trial. For such a tack to actually succeed, a jury like the one in the OJ Simpson trial has to be impaneled, in which case, all bets are off, anyway.

The fact that a person has prepared carefully for the likelihood of having to fight for his life does not change the actual facts, unless the system is completely turned upside down and subject to a media circus. Yes, it can happen, and it is more likely to happen some places than others. But if a person believes that a tweak or two on his weapon or ammo makes him more likely to be successful in a fight for his life, he should take advantage and survive. As far as I can tell, any time the actual equipment used comes into play, it is used to add a small amount of extra weight to some other, more compelling evidence of wrongdoing.

Yeah for the most part I agree, but never underestimate a Lawyer (OR Prosecuter{or Federal Judge}) in New York, California( Especially San Francisco), OR Chicago. There's a good chance they will be pinko livered Antis with a KING SIZE agenda!!!

DoctorWho · February 2016

The only thing I would say is; if you modify a trigger to a point it is very light, you run a risk, if it becomes an issue in a Court case, however you modify any gun past what a manufacturer designs and builds as a so called "safely designed" firearm, could be used against a gun owner, if it did come up in a Court case, that said gun owner rendered a firearm unsafe by modifications, although that being a very remote possibility, it bears careful condideration.

That is why I like to leave factory stock options alone in a CCW sidearm, as a precaution in the very remote chance I ever did have to defend myself in Court, my ammo choice being stock LE use ammo, so there is precedence as far as data and safety.

You would have the most trouble in a Negligent discharge situation or any harmful or wrongful act resulting from or occuring after an intentional modification of a firearm resulting in injury or death of another person, if the modification did not result from accidental or incidental damage.

So if you accidentally shoot someone at a range, and you modified the trigger to a very light weight, if you are sued, it could be very bad if you are found negligent.

And this could happen in any State.

BAMAAK · February 2016

DoctorWho wrote: »

The only thing I would say is; if you modify a trigger to a point it is very light, you run a risk, if it becomes an issue in a Court case, however you modify any gun past what a manufacturer designs and builds as a so called "safely designed" firearm, could be used against a gun owner, if it did come up in a Court case, that said gun owner rendered a firearm unsafe by modifications, although that being a very remote possibility, it bears careful condideration.

That is why I like to leave factory stock options alone in a CCW sidearm, as a precaution in the very remote chance I ever did have to defend myself in Court, my ammo choice being stock LE use ammo, so there is precedence as far as data and safety.

You would have the most trouble in a Negligent discharge situation or any harmful or wrongful act resulting from or occuring after an intentional modification of a firearm resulting in injury or death of another person, if the modification did not result from accidental or incidental damage.

So if you accidentally shoot someone at a range, and you modified the trigger to a very light weight, if you are sued, it could be very bad if you are found negligent.

And this could happen in any State.

Many free states have laws preventing you from being sued if there are no criminal charges (or guilt) in a defensive shooting. George Zimmerman was a famous example of that.

timc · February 2016

I for one am not going to worry about what bullets I use or what parts are in my gun.

If I need it to defend myself and it does the job it is how it should be. I think worrying about stuff like that is like worrying about getting prosecuted after an accident for aftermarket tires and wheels on your vehicle when the accident wasn't even your fault!

DoctorWho · February 2016

If you modify a gun, and some rotten DA somehow seizes on the premiss that you were neglegent because you rendered your firearm unsafe by modifying its trigger pull to 2 ounces, no preemption law will save you.

Each person will decide what is best for their needs, I simply try to keep things simple, it works best for me, and I like success myself, and so far, I have had success in my personal defense encounters.

breamfisher · February 2016

bisley wrote: »

I've already done that. I'm just saying that there is little to no compelling evidence that lawyers win by attacking the equipment being used by the good guy, when all the rest of the evidence supports his story...wherever it happens.

Since Ayoob usually writes on such things, I don't have the materials in front of me, and I'm going by memory, please don't take this as gospel, but:

I believe there's one case where a prosecutor made a deal about a fellow having removed a mag disconnect in a handgun a man had. It wasn't the pistol in question in the shooting, but the prosecutor was trying to show a pattern of recklessness. The shooting was ruled justifiable due to self defense.

There's two cases where people got in trouble for handloads. One was a police officer, and he was acquitted. Another was a man whose wife committed suicide, and I believe he went to jail. Further examination of the situation does cast doubt on the man.

There may be one or two situations where aftermarket parts were an issue.

We're talking about maybe a half a dozen cases. Since a SD shooting is such a low probability situation, the chances of you getting into those sorts of situations with a modified gun or ammo are really pretty low to begin with. It's probably like winning the lottery and getting hit by an asteroid in the same day. I'd really not worry about it, but instead worry that I put myself in a situation where an honorable prosecutor could send me away for. In other words, I'd be more more concerned that the shoot was "righteous" than that some huckster prosecutor was looking to pad his resume.

DoctorWho · February 2016

Reprint of Massad Ayoob article on reloads involved in wife commits suicide with husbands revolver.

http://www.boiseshooters.com/index.php?topic=1883.0

bisley · February 2016

Ayoob makes a good living being an expert witness. His testimony was instrumental in getting an acquittal for a homeowner in my town that shot and killed a home invader while he was escaping the scene. It was the only case I can ever remember where such a person was actually indicted, in this area. I think he is a great guy who knows what he is talking about, especially when it comes to cases that go to court and require trials. But I also think that the evidence he gives for his stand on hand loads and such are simply preventive measures based on his personal experience, and not on typical cases. It can happen, but it is the least of my worries if I ever have to be involved in a gunfight. The overwhelming majority of cases are pretty clear-cut when everything finally gets sorted out, and any place I'm willing to live is going to favor the citizen who is trying to live within the law.

Gene L · February 2016

If you have an accidental shooting as opposed to a justified shooting, then you got to worry. If your pistol has a hair trigger, you'll probably find the defense of your trigger harder to maintain. Or any other peculiarity of your gun. Or if it's bone stock, you're still in trouble.

If the shooting is justified, doesn't matter how light the trigger pull is. There is no law I know of that regulates trigger pull. I'm not a lawyer, however, and I may be wrong.

Buford · February 2016

I doubt you can live anywhere and not be subject to stupid lawsuits.

Zee · February 2016

No amount of "bone stock" can fix a bad shoot.

DoctorWho · February 2016

When you have a justified shoot as a civilian they are still going to take away your gun and do ballistics testing on it, and if it has a 3 ounce trigger, and some pollyanna wants to make a big deal about it, you may have trouble or not, it all depends.

Even as a LEO, you have to present your gun for inspection......

breamfisher · February 2016

bisley wrote: »

Ayoob makes a good living being an expert witness. .... But I also think that the evidence he gives for his stand on hand loads and such are simply preventive measures based on his personal experience, and not on typical cases. It can happen, but it is the least of my worries if I ever have to be involved in a gunfight. The overwhelming majority of cases are pretty clear-cut when everything finally gets sorted out, and any place I'm willing to live is going to favor the citizen who is trying to live within the law.

Remember the thread I started a while back about instructors and their backgrounds shaping what they teach? Ayoob's also an instructor, and from what I can tell he covers "court-proofing" your actions quite a bit. I think his experience as an expert witness has shaped that, and he's basically taking the ultimate no-hassle route: keep it stock, use LE-type ammo, yada yada yada. When you see only one or two cases where these things have been an issue (and realistically there's probably been more cases where it occurred but was not an issue, however we don't have court documents to back it up) the worries become, in my mind, over-inflated.

bisley · February 2016

I agree. It's something I pay attention to, if it's not too inconvenient. For example, when ammo was really scarce, I used some very good hand loads for my 9mm's, on the few occasions where I wanted to carry a 9mm. When the factory SD ammo I like became available, again, I bought some. It's in my mind, but I do not adhere to it, religiously, because I don't believe in a high risk of all the factors coming together to create situation where it might matter. In actual practice, my normal carry weapon is a completely stock pistol, with factory ammo.

Teach · February 2016

Didn't the entire NYPD go to Glock triggers that took 3 men and a young boy to pull because their guys couldn't keep their booger hooks off the trigger and ended up with a bunch of ND's, sometimes shooting themselves in the process?
Jerry

breamfisher · February 2016

Teach wrote: »

Didn't the entire NYPD go to Glock triggers that took 3 men and a young boy to pull because their guys couldn't keep their booger hooks off the trigger and ended up with a bunch of ND's, sometimes shooting themselves in the process?
Jerry

Yep. Turns out it was a bad habit they learned when shooting revolvers. But some folks advocate them because the NYPD uses them...

Diver43 · February 2016

The more I think about this, the less I worry. It seems when looking at all the shootings that make the headlines, they often will say something like a .40caliber glock or high powered rifle but nothing about triggers, scopes or anything like that.
I am sure it has come out in one way or another a few times, but not worth a worry.

DoctorWho · February 2016

breamfisher wrote: »

Yep. Turns out it was a bad habit they learned when shooting revolvers. But some folks advocate them because the NYPD uses them...

When I was doing supplemental training for the NYPD, the revolvers were DA, the main problem was many officers were cocking hammers then shooting the suspect in the back prior to handcuffing / holstering the revolver, then along came the DAO revolvers with a 16 pound trigger that Teach spoke of, requiring 2 men and a boy to pull !

Finally, spring kits that lowered trigger pull to a normal level were approved, making a great difference, lots of women just had trouble with those special order S&Ws.

Jayhawker · February 2016

Were they still as good at stacking up innocent bystanders in those days?

DoctorWho · February 2016

Lots of Boston cream donuts were laid to waist in those dark days of the Empire ! lol

Gene L · February 2016

Glock NY triggers were 11 pounds or so. It's been twelve years or so since I went to the Glock Armorers School (which was one day) and I've forgotten everything I ever knew about them.

DoctorWho · February 2016

Those heavy triggers were not on Glocks originally, they were the last of the summer wine revolvers.

Those S&W DAO models special ordered from S&W...... not some abstract Lew Horton creations.

including misc revolvers, Ruger among others not depicted....

Guns and Ammo

Forums

After market parts

Replies

MORE YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN

Forums

After market parts

Replies

GET THE MAGAZINE Subscribe & Save

MORE YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN

GET THE NEWSLETTER Join the List and Never Miss a Thing.