Glock Talk banner

OEM Glock vs. Lone Wolf Timber Wolf vs. the law?

1718 44
I occasionally read that a carry gun should not be customized outside of its OEM condition for CC. Supposedly one that is changed to meet a specific owners preferences could be a legal point of contention if the gun had to be used in a self defense event as far as the legal right to defend is concerned. My question is then how would a specific gun like the Lone Wolf Timber Wolf bought complete from LW, which is completely custom, be looked at in such a circumstance. Would it be considered OEM?
1 - 4 of 4 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
4,887 Posts
Mas Ayoob personally told me that there have been cases where a lighter trigger was used as evidence of an AD/ND by a savvy prosecutor. I value his word. I shoot better with my minus connector, but my pocket carried G26 has a + connector.

I suppose outside the waistband while riding on my tractor I could pretty easily justify having a nice 3 pound trigger to whack coyotes across the field. Probably could carry it all the time in Georgia, but why risk it.

To the OP’s question, any of the custom weapons people carry even if OEM by a small company, could be used to paint the carrier as a psychopath. The more vanilla and boring, the better. It all falls on a spectrum of risk mitigation and the trade off’s you’re willing to accept.

If you were trying to stop an active shooter, you could use a comp’ed 9x25 dillon with the hottest reloads ever cooked up, shot from a tricked out gun with a 2 pound trigger. You’d be a hero, praised by all for the lives you saved.

If you’re in a dark alley in a left-leaning municipality, with no witnesses and a Travonesque situation transpires, a ‘dot’ connector in your Gen 3 could screw you.

My idea is to carry OEM internals for reliability and legitimacy, and make damn sure that if I have to defend myself (god forbid) that it’s a ‘good shoot’.

One last note, there’s probably a reason that police departments don’t let their officers install ghost rockets and other ninja gear. Typically the citizen will be held to a far higher standard than LEO’s in deadly force cases.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,887 Posts
Full Version here:

http://smith-wessonforum.com/concea...facts-about-light-trigger-pull-liability.html

THE LIGHT TRIGGER PULL ISSUE

By Massad Ayoob




Common Misconceptions
When this topic is discussed in gun forums, certain themes predictably arise. Let’s discuss them now.
“They won’t know I had a light trigger.” MISCONCEPTION. Of course they ‘ll know. It is routine procedure for every firearm recovered after a shooting to be sent to the crime lab, where it will be intensively examined by a professional Firearms and Toolmark Examiner who is likely to be currently certified as an armorer with most common handguns. Trigger pulls are routinely weighed and cross-checked with manufacturer specifications to determine if they are within spec. All safety devices are checked. (The reason, among others, is to preclude a criminal from claiming that a murder weapon was defective and went off by itself.)
“I’ll just say I shot him intentionally, and that will be that.” MISCONCEPTION. News flash: if everyone was accepting what you say, even if you speak the truth, you wouldn’t be in court. I would expect the opposing counsel’s opening statement to include something like, “The defendant is so reckless and arrogant he can’t admit he made a deadly mistake. He’ll probably tell you something like ‘I, like Inspector Clouseau, meant to do that.’”
“That’s only a concern if you shot someone by accident.” MISCONCEPTION. All they have to do is ALLEGE that you fired by accident due to the hair trigger effect. A classic example is Florida v. Luis Alvarez, where the cornerstone of the state’s case against the officer was that he had (A) cocked the hammer of his Smith & Wesson, which (B) had two coils removed from the trigger return spring. Yes, he was ultimately acquitted…after a fourteen-month ordeal that included an eight-to-nine-week trial. A detailed account of this case can be found in the autobiography of one of his attorneys, Roy Black, titled “Black’s Law.”
“I always keep my booger hooker off the bang switch, so this will never be an issue for me.” MISCONCEPTION. First, even if you HAVE kept your finger off the trigger until you intentionally fired, remember the point made earlier: you can’t count on what you SAY in court automatically being BELIEVED in court. Second, a seasoned cross-examiner would simply reply, “We all know you’re supposed to keep your finger off the trigger until you’re in the act of intentionally firing…AND WE’RE SAYING THAT YOU DIDN’T! WE CONTEND THAT YOU MADE A MISTAKE! Are you telling this jury that you’re an absolutely perfect human being who is INCAPABLE of making a mistake?”
Tell us how you’re going to answer that, without sounding like the personification of reckless arrogance the cross-examiner is portraying you to be?
Second, you can expect opposing counsel to discover the European study found HERE Force Science News #3: Can You Really Prevent Unintentional Discharges? in which it was discovered that even well-trained cops did not realize their fingers were touching their triggers in high-stress simulated danger situations. It’s called “trigger affirmation” by training expert Tom Aveni, and also “trigger confirmation” or “trigger verification.” And it can happen even with the most highly trained personnel.
“There has never been a conviction resulting from the hair trigger allegation!” MISCONCEPTION. Here are two, just from my personal experience. NY v. Magliato, where Frank Magliato unintentionally discharged the cocked revolver he had pointed at his assailant, killing him. Sent to prison originally for Depraved Murder, the appellate court reduced the conviction only to Manslaughter, with the majority opinion holding that it was reckless and negligent to aim a gun with such a light trigger pull at a man one obviously did not intend to shoot at that moment. (The minority opinion held that doing so did indeed constitute Depraved Murder under NY law.) And in Canada there was Crown v. Gossett, a criminal trial involving a cop whose service revolver probably was cocked when it unintentionally discharged, killing an unarmed suspect. Gossett was convicted of Manslaughter in his first trial, but thankfully, acquitted in his second trial.
“I’ll just tell the Court that I had the light trigger so I wouldn’t miss and hit an innocent bystander.” MISCONCEPTION. Whether you say that in a gun forum discussion or in court, you can expect the opposing side to say, “So, you ADMIT your competence with a gun was so poor that you realized EVEN BEFOREHAND that you were likely to hit an innocent bystander instead of your intended target if you didn’t have your special ‘orthopedic trigger’? Why weren’t you honest enough to admit that you weren’t ready to be carrying or even keeping a loaded gun for self defense in public yet?” That argument HELPS anyone trying to paint you as incompetent and negligent.

Having been involved personally in several cases involving lighter-than-factory-spec triggers presented as “hair trigger cases,” including the Alvarez, Gossett, and Magliato cases mentioned above, I think that the collective law enforcement experience in countless such cases speaks to the wisdom of keeping “factory ‘duty spec’ trigger pulls” on any firearmone is likely to use for self-defense purposes.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
4,887 Posts
All this is a little off topic to OP’s question. Not sure about case law with lesser manufacturers like Timberwolf or Ninja shops like Agency Arms. My gut tells me, all things being equal, bone stock from a Major manufacturer will always be the safer bet when considering all possible circumstances.
 
1 - 4 of 4 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