Has anyone else been advised that upgrading a pistol that is then used in self defense is a bad idea from a legal defense standpoint? 
 

I’ve been advised multiple times of this which doesn’t make any sense.  If true, can someone please explain where it comes from?

I've heard this too. I supposed it could give prosecutors extra ammo against you. For example, if the trigger upgrade has a lighter pull and you use that weapon in self-defense. Anything that might make the weapon perceived as "more dangerous."

Also on the list: AR ejection port doors with sayings that could misconstrued, Zombie killer rounds, and similar.

 

1 hour ago, Gr935 said:

Has anyone else been advised that upgrading a pistol that is then used in self defense is a bad idea from a legal defense standpoint? 
 

I’ve been advised multiple times of this which doesn’t make any sense.  If true, can someone please explain where it comes from?

The ALG Defense Advanced Combat Trigger (ACT) is designed for those shooters where tradition, value and regulatory concerns are of primary importance. The pull of the ACT is very similar to a standard mil-spec trigger, however it is sharper and the grittiness of the stock trigger pull has been removed while the traditional reliability of a stock trigger remains. The pull weight is not lower than the M4/M16 minimum weight specification of 5.5lbs.

Can't go wrong with these! I love them!

7 minutes ago, JohnnyB said:

The ALG Defense Advanced Combat Trigger (ACT)

Not a terrible trigger compared to a mil-spec, I had one in my M4gery, but I prefer the additional safety of a two stage Geissele SSA-E

I think the OP is talking about a handgun

46 minutes ago, silverado427 said:

I think the OP is talking about a handgun

You are correct.  I learned to shoot and have been shooting my Glock 19 for a very long time.  I have other pistols with far more refined triggers but I shoot this one better just due to the time and rounds I’ve put through it.  I picked up a 48 and the trigger is nothing like my 19.  Hoping someone has some insight.

24 minutes ago, silverado427 said:

I think the OP is talking about a handgun

Doesn't matter.  The question will still come up regardless of what type of firearm

18 hours ago, Xtors said:

I've heard this too. I supposed it could give prosecutors extra ammo against you. For example, if the trigger upgrade has a lighter pull and you use that weapon in self-defense. Anything that might make the weapon perceived as "more dangerous."

Also on the list: AR ejection port doors with sayings that could misconstrued, Zombie killer rounds, and similar.

 

I’m wondering if a prosecutor would treat an optic as an upgrade.

 

4 hours ago, Gr935 said:

I’m wondering if a prosecutor would treat an optic as an upgrade.

Nothing would surprise me but I'd also think it would be easy to defend.

4 hours ago, Mr.Stu said:

 

By this logic no one should be building their own AR, which to me is patently ridiculous.

4 hours ago, Gr935 said:

I’m wondering if a prosecutor would treat an optic as an upgrade.

 

2 minutes ago, Xtors said:

Nothing would surprise me but I'd also think it would be easy to defend.

About six or seven years ago some Florida democrat wrote up a gun ban bill designating all scoped centerfire rifles as sniper rifles.  The bill went nowhere, but that's where all the unconstitutional democrat bills used to go.  Give it some time.

1 hour ago, Scorpio64 said:

 

About six or seven years ago some Florida democrat wrote up a gun ban bill designating all scoped centerfire rifles as sniper rifles.  The bill went nowhere, but that's where all the unconstitutional democrat bills used to go.  Give it some time.

It just sounds to me like it’s a fear from attorneys because it makes their job harder.  I have yet to hear if a live actual example where an outcome was dictated due to upgraded parts.  I hope someone chimes in to correct me or clarify.

40 minutes ago, Gr935 said:

It just sounds to me like it’s a fear from attorneys because it makes their job harder.  I have yet to hear if a live actual example where an outcome was dictated due to upgraded parts.  I hope someone chimes in to correct me or clarify.

I don't remember the details, but there was a guy who ran into difficulty because he had "you're fucked" etched on the inside of his dust cover

If a prosecutor is looking at trigger or sight mods you're in more trobule.  There had to be something wrong in the SD shooting to get down to these factors.

17 hours ago, Xtors said:

By this logic no one should be building their own AR, which to me is patently ridiculous.

That's not at all what I got out of the video.

15 hours ago, Mr.Stu said:

I don't remember the details, but there was a guy who ran into difficulty because he had "you're fucked" etched on the inside of his dust cover

Which is specifically what they recommended against in the video.

13 hours ago, GRIZ said:

If a prosecutor is looking at trigger or sight mods you're in more trobule.  There had to be something wrong in the SD shooting to get down to these factors.

I agree. 

 

I always believed that the shoot was either good, or... not. The only way a trigger job becomes an issue is if it appears you didn't mean to fire the gun, or hit something/one you shouldn't have. 

 

Will the prosecution argue you made your gun easier to use and more accurate? Or that you didn't have control of the firearm?

On 6/13/2023 at 5:10 PM, Gr935 said:

Has anyone else been advised that upgrading a pistol that is then used in self defense is a bad idea from a legal defense standpoint? 
 

I’ve been advised multiple times of this which doesn’t make any sense.  If true, can someone please explain where it comes from?

i've actually wondered this a lot of late, and was considering putting the stock barrell back in my carry gun......

23 hours ago, Xtors said:

Nothing would surprise me but I'd also think it would be easy to defend.

i think that since some cops are moving to them it should be super easy to defend

 

11 hours ago, JackDaWack said:

I agree. 

 

I always believed that the shoot was either good, or... not. The only way a trigger job becomes an issue is if it appears you didn't mean to fire the gun, or hit something/one you shouldn't have. 

 

Will the prosecution argue you made your gun easier to use and more accurate? Or that you didn't have control of the firearm?

One incident I can think of is you have an UID and someone gets hurt. You put a 3lb trigger in your Glock. Notnan issue if it's a comp only gun.

Anything you do to make your gun more accurate, other than a lighter trigger pull, should not be an issue.

10 hours ago, 1LtCAP said:

i've actually wondered this a lot of late, and was considering putting the stock barrell back in my carry gun......

I wouldn't worry about that.

7 hours ago, GRIZ said:

One incident I can think of is you have an UID and someone gets hurt. You put a 3lb trigger in your Glock. Notnan issue if it's a comp only gun.

Anything you do to make your gun more accurate, other than a lighter trigger pull, should not be an issue.

I wouldn't worry about that.

My understanding is a quality kydex holster will prevent UID.  So if a UID is the only concern with a modified trigger do you feel a SDS with a modified trigger would be a concern?  
 

I’m trying to find some live examples where precedent has been set.  The origin of this fear that we have in NJ.  

2 hours ago, Gr935 said:

My understanding is a quality kydex holster will prevent UID.  So if a UID is the only concern with a modified trigger do you feel a SDS with a modified trigger would be a concern?  
 

I’m trying to find some live examples where precedent has been set.  The origin of this fear that we have in NJ.  

There is no precedent.

There is no law that prevents you from making a trigger upgrade.

With that said, if it's something that concerns you keep everything stock.

3 hours ago, Gr935 said:

My understanding is a quality kydex holster will prevent UID

I would not say that a specific holster will prevent an UID - it's only just one factor to help minimize the risk of an UID.

6 hours ago, Gr935 said:

My understanding is a quality kydex holster will prevent UID.  So if a UID is the only concern with a modified trigger do you feel a SDS with a modified trigger would be a concern?  
 

I’m trying to find some live examples where precedent has been set.  The origin of this fear that we have in NJ.  

A quality leather holster will do anything kydex can do.  I've leather Glock holsters I've used for 25+ years.

10 hours ago, Gr935 said:

My understanding is a quality kydex holster will prevent UID.  So if a UID is the only concern with a modified trigger do you feel a SDS with a modified trigger would be a concern?  
 

I’m trying to find some live examples where precedent has been set.  The origin of this fear that we have in NJ.  

Uids don't happen because of a holster they happen because of negligence re holstering a fire arm and not "looking" the gun into the holster.  Debris mostly bunched up clothing is the culprit 

14 hours ago, Vdep217 said:

Uids don't happen because of a holster they happen because of negligence re holstering a fire arm and not "looking" the gun into the holster.  Debris mostly bunched up clothing is the culprit 

Agree.

It was beaten into me long ago that there's no such thing as in 'unintentional discharge"...

I'm wondering what the consensus is for a pistol that comes stock with a good trigger. 

1 hour ago, 124gr9mm said:

Agree.

It was beaten into me long ago that there's no such thing as in 'unintentional discharge"...

Agreed! An AD can only happen with a gun malfunction. A ND is when your negligence causes the gun to fire when you did not want it to!

There is no UID! In a lifetime of shooting I have had zero ADs and One ND. The ND was caused by my own stupidity and I will never forget that day and thank God I did not hurt anyone! It has made me anal to the extreme when it comes to handling any gun!

1 hour ago, JohnnyB said:

Agreed! An AD can only happen with a gun malfunction. A ND is when your negligence causes the gun to fire when you did not want it to!

There is no UID! In a lifetime of shooting I have had zero ADs and One ND. The ND was caused by my own stupidity and I will never forget that day and thank God I did not hurt anyone! It has made me anal to the extreme when it comes to handling any gun!

There is no such thing as an accidental discharge.   The gun was loaded intentionally.  Even an unintentional discharge there shouldnt be injury as we treat every gun as if it loaded and always keep muzzle in a safe direction. 

4 hours ago, Vdep217 said:

There is no such thing as an accidental discharge.   The gun was loaded intentionally.  Even an unintentional discharge there shouldnt be injury as we treat every gun as if it loaded and always keep muzzle in a safe direction. 

Some Sig P320 owners might disagree with you!