wow! Didn't expect so many people would respond. Thanks to all of you and although I lived in Oregon for a while where your not considered capable of pumping your own gas I used to do it occasionally anyway... does that give me credibility with one of you?
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?
21 - 40 of 45 Posts
Joined
·
15,111 Posts
SAV
SAVAGE!!
"I intended to shoot him."
Joined
·
15,252 Posts
I said, you can do a search on this forum. I and several others have provided cases where mechanical modifications, and other related juror perceptions, were an issue in court. I am not here to do your research.
I see that you are in central Texas - not too far from Little Rock, AR. I'm not the biggest fan of Tom Givins - but he and his wife, Lynn, organize an excellent conference (Tactical Conference) on "all things" about defensive gun use and security threats. The conference was just outside of Little Rock, Arkansas last year, and the 2018 conference is supposed to be in the same location. He usually has several presenters on SD law - if I recall correctly, he had at least four (4) presenters last year maybe five (5) or six (6) - I'd have to review my notes to be for sure - (the excellent - Andrew Branca, Mas Ayoob and Manny Kapelsohn among them). The presentations aren't the same as going to a law class, or the presenters "full" class(es) but it is a good overview and you get to talk to them face-to-face; either publicly or privately.
Don't trust me, trust them - if you chose to - they are the experts in the field.
http://rangemaster.com/2018-tactical-conference/
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.
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.
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.
Joined
·
15,252 Posts
Not mentioned in the article, (IIRC) other issues in the Alvarez case was that his revolver didn't have factory stocks (grips) and that a amateur "kitchen table gunsmith" had made the modifications to the firearm. These issues were addressed by expert witnesses, but added time and expense to Alvarez's trial.
Also, like the Zimmerman case, there was political pressure to prosecute Alvarez by the State Attorney, Janet Reno.
I was also advised to say that you are having chest pains and are in need of immediate medical attention. This get's you an immediate ambulance ride out of there and several hours to get your ducks in a row with counsel.
I have heard that two ways: Some people have said that saying " I feel too stressed, sick etc" will give you some extra time. I was advised by the ex police chief and the attorney not to bring up any health issues as a reason for not talking as it may later be used to show you were not really up to making a critical decision. Just like getting in an accident with your car, you don't want anyone to know you were 20 hours etc without sleep. Just don't give them ANYTHING at that point, as your lawyer should know how to get you all the time you need to begin answering questions. he may tell the police that you need medical attention first. All of that is out the window in the case where you are actually having chest pains etc.
It is really crazy how certain things may work in one jurisdiction and work against you in another.
Joined
·
15,252 Posts
Probably not good advice, don't lie about anything, don't do anything to diminish your credibility, honesty is the best policy.
You can honestly say that you've been through a traumatic event and you want to cooperate fully with after you have met with your attorney.
Runs in line with what I was told for two reasons. NO additional information until you have an attorney present is one reason. The other being a more recent piece of advice that came from a policeman who says it is now getting to be common for opiut abusers/addicts to tell police similar things when they get picked on any sort of charges. That way they get taken to a medical facility first and are more likely to be treated for any easy time period while coming down or withdrawing. So lots of police are not too sympathetic and it may open an entirely new line of questioning and some complications. Honestly declining until your attorney arrives no matter how good of a politician you feel like you are is still the best from what the sources I have, say.
Well I've actually been involved in a defensive shooting. Requesting medical attention stopped the NOPD officer from taking me to jail for the weekend. Which was procedure when the corrupt Harry Connick was DA.
Joined
·
4,025 Posts
At first I was confused by what a "DGU" was. I looked it up on the Internet. Hopefully this will clear up the confusion.:
http://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/DGU
Joined
·
11,026 Posts
OEM internals are best imo.
And as to the advice that carrying what LEO locally carries being a bad idea, I say not true.
A hard charging political prosecutor can say anything, but a 1st year lawyer ought to be able to deflect that one. But different jurisdictions handle things differently.
Just my $.02. YMMV.
And as to the advice that carrying what LEO locally carries being a bad idea, I say not true.
A hard charging political prosecutor can say anything, but a 1st year lawyer ought to be able to deflect that one. But different jurisdictions handle things differently.
Just my $.02. YMMV.
Joined
·
16,885 Posts
I expect any prosecuting attorney worth his salt might try to make a case along those lines, but as of yet have not read a single incident where that was a successful tactic to sway a jury.
Joined
·
15,252 Posts
Glad it worked out for you.
I am glad it worked too. I hope I have the presence of mind to stick to the advice I was already given should I ever get in that situation. The big take away is to pretty much do like the police do themselves and not to anything quotable until you have an attorney with you, all things being considered.
a,
Joined
·
286 Posts
The recent acquittal of an Arizona cop had an interesting item that was not allowed to be told to the jury. Mesa police officer Philip Brailsford had an AR-15 rifle with the phrase "You're F—ed" etched into it.
I am sure that if a civilian had used an AR with a similar etching on it, they would allow it and would be used against you.
Be careful out there, the rules are not the same for everyone.
I am sure that if a civilian had used an AR with a similar etching on it, they would allow it and would be used against you.
Be careful out there, the rules are not the same for everyone.
If I recall that anything mistakenly said after requesting medical attention could be claimed to be under duress. ie I felt that medical attention was being denied until I said something...anything. BTW This advice was given to my by a family friend and Colonel in another Parish. I called him while I was waiting for the NOPD to arrive.
21 - 40 of 45 Posts
