Glock Pro Forums banner
21 - 21 of 21 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,247 Posts
I know it's a really common discussion to say that a DA or civil attorney would make the argument that the modified gun meant something (i.e. he lightened the trigger because he wanted to kill people), but to my knowledge it's never happened. It's such a weak argument to substantiate I'm not sure someone would risk their entire case trying to make this point, if they failed they could lose the whole case. By itself it doesn't really show a state of mind which is what they'd have to prove.

As long as it's a justified (clean) shooting, I don't believe legal modifications would change anything.

However, if during the attempt to defend yourself a shot went wild and hit an innocent - then the modification would be a potential problem. The argument would be that the modification itself caused the unintended death. No one has to try and prove a state of mind, they only have to demonstrate the facts of the event and allow the jury to conclude if the lighter trigger was part of the reason the gun was fired when you didn't mean for it to be (not aimed at the perp). Then the question is raised about accountability for the decision to modify the gun.
 
21 - 21 of 21 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top