Stock Guns ONLY for Self Defense?
- Thread starter Spieler
- Start date
- Status
I don't think that in a perfectly clean and just shooting any mods will count against you but what shooting is so clean cut? Lawyers deal in the gray area and nothing is as black and white to them as it may be to you. You may be 100% in the right but any lawyer worth his salt will find an angle to attack you with. All Ayoob is saying is, don't give them them any extra ammo to come at you with.
There are enough quality guns and ammo on the market that you are not really giving up much by just using them. The slight difference between high quality factory defence ammo and your home brew ammo is not worth the rish of being labled a gun nut in court.
BTW, yes I removed the mag safety on my hi power but I never intended to use that gun as a self defense weapon. It was just a range gun. My self defense guns are stock.
There are enough quality guns and ammo on the market that you are not really giving up much by just using them. The slight difference between high quality factory defence ammo and your home brew ammo is not worth the rish of being labled a gun nut in court.
BTW, yes I removed the mag safety on my hi power but I never intended to use that gun as a self defense weapon. It was just a range gun. My self defense guns are stock.
Mute
Member
I think Ayoob's point has always been that if you do modify or customize your gun, make sure you are able and prepared to justify why you did so. I've never concluded, based on his articles, that you should never modify your weapons.
Bobarino
member
its tough to speculate what might happen in a civil or criminal trial. i have enough faith in myself that if i shoot someone in self defense, it will be justified and hopefully, no charges will even be file thus negating the criminal trial. if it does go to a criminal trial, i do not want any mods that make my gun easier to shoot. mainly because, i have interacted with the general public for work for the last 12 years and i have absolutely ZERO faith in the general public's ability to use or even posses common sense. those who say "hogwash" and such, think about the people you see and interact with on the street everyday. i'm not talking about your friends that you see all the time and that have a similar mindset as you. i'm talking about the general public. the soccer mom in line at the grocery store with her 7 kids that are making a mess out of someone else's store. the one with a Sierra Club bumper sticker on her SUV with dented front bumper that she parked on the curb in the no parking zone. the guy driving his 1974 Cadillac at 22 mph in the fast lane on the freeway that smokes so much you can't even see the car in front of you. they are your jurors. they will decide if you go to jail or not. if you think its "hogwash" then you have more faith in people than i do. this is a bit of a cynical, and pessimistic viewpoint but its more true than some might think.
i sometimes wonder why people are willing to put so much faith in the jury to to do he right thing and depend on others to protect them in court when choosing NOT to depend on others is likely a big factor in your decision to carry a gun in the first place.
civil trials are a whole other ballgame. if it happens to me, you can bet i'll be crying like a 6 year old school girl and trying to convince the jury that i have severe emotional scars from being victimized and forced to take another life. indignant remarks and "so? i shot him, he deserved it" will not be a part of my defense. that may work in Texas, but not in the greater Seattle area. your politcal environment should be a factor to consider when choosing what, how and when to carry. it sucks that those things even need to be considered. it shouldn't be that way. but it is. and not considering surrounding factors other than gun and holster choices is a little ignorant. please don't take that as an insult its not meant to be. just my opinions.
Bobby
i sometimes wonder why people are willing to put so much faith in the jury to to do he right thing and depend on others to protect them in court when choosing NOT to depend on others is likely a big factor in your decision to carry a gun in the first place.
civil trials are a whole other ballgame. if it happens to me, you can bet i'll be crying like a 6 year old school girl and trying to convince the jury that i have severe emotional scars from being victimized and forced to take another life. indignant remarks and "so? i shot him, he deserved it" will not be a part of my defense. that may work in Texas, but not in the greater Seattle area. your politcal environment should be a factor to consider when choosing what, how and when to carry. it sucks that those things even need to be considered. it shouldn't be that way. but it is. and not considering surrounding factors other than gun and holster choices is a little ignorant. please don't take that as an insult its not meant to be. just my opinions.
Bobby
Standing Wolf
Member in memoriam
Anybody who doesn't like my light triggers doesn't have to break into my house.
Preacherman
Member
Old Fuff, you make a good point - in fact, Seiden made his rep. as a self-defence lawyer on precisely that case, in Miami (against Janet Reno, no less, who was State A-G at the time 
).
I've read as much as I can about this, and done three courses with Mas Ayoob, precisely because his ongoing legal work, with lawyers, prosecutors and judges, does indeed bear out the point that shyster lawyers will use anything and everything against you in a civil case in order to get their grubby paws on your hard-earned money. Heck, there are many documented cases where lawyers have contacted someone who was involved in a perfectly justifiable defensive shooting, and was no-billed by a Grand Jury, and told them that if they will only provide the name of their insurance company, there need be no nasty lawsuit over the "unfortunate accident" that left their client injured or dead. Their unspoken implication was that they'd make an outrageous claim against the insurer, who would then (all too often, unfortunately) offer to settle out of court for a much smaller sum, rather than face the cost of a trial, and that way the bottom-feeding lawyer and his client would split at least some money.
My carry guns are therefore totally standard, except for the addition of night sights and an action job, if necessary. There is nothing like a very light single-action trigger that a shyster can fasten upon as possible evidence of a negligent discharge (in fact, my carry revolvers have all been rendered DAO for this purpose - with a super-smooth action job by Clark Custom Guns, they really don't need to be cocked, anyway!
). I use Glocks and SIG's as carry pistols, as these are both in use by Federal law enforcement agencies as duty weapons, and load them with ammunition which is the same as that selected by the Feds for their agents. Any lawyer who wants to allege that I'm carrying an unsafe weapon, or using particularly brutal, nasty ammunition, will have to try to explain in court how national law enforcement agencies and individuals are guilty of the same charges... Somehow, I don't see the average jury buying their argument!
).I've read as much as I can about this, and done three courses with Mas Ayoob, precisely because his ongoing legal work, with lawyers, prosecutors and judges, does indeed bear out the point that shyster lawyers will use anything and everything against you in a civil case in order to get their grubby paws on your hard-earned money. Heck, there are many documented cases where lawyers have contacted someone who was involved in a perfectly justifiable defensive shooting, and was no-billed by a Grand Jury, and told them that if they will only provide the name of their insurance company, there need be no nasty lawsuit over the "unfortunate accident" that left their client injured or dead. Their unspoken implication was that they'd make an outrageous claim against the insurer, who would then (all too often, unfortunately) offer to settle out of court for a much smaller sum, rather than face the cost of a trial, and that way the bottom-feeding lawyer and his client would split at least some money.
My carry guns are therefore totally standard, except for the addition of night sights and an action job, if necessary. There is nothing like a very light single-action trigger that a shyster can fasten upon as possible evidence of a negligent discharge (in fact, my carry revolvers have all been rendered DAO for this purpose - with a super-smooth action job by Clark Custom Guns, they really don't need to be cocked, anyway!
). I use Glocks and SIG's as carry pistols, as these are both in use by Federal law enforcement agencies as duty weapons, and load them with ammunition which is the same as that selected by the Feds for their agents. Any lawyer who wants to allege that I'm carrying an unsafe weapon, or using particularly brutal, nasty ammunition, will have to try to explain in court how national law enforcement agencies and individuals are guilty of the same charges... Somehow, I don't see the average jury buying their argument!Preacherman:
I think you have made some very intelligent choices. Everything you have, including the night-sights will pass muster because they are commonly used by law enforcement agencies. My pocket revolvers are either converted to double-action only, or are of the kind that has enclosed hammers. My larger ones are still “SA/DA†though, and I have arguments with myself over this. I may bite-the-bullet and convert a “K†frame S&W.
I can’t convert my single-action automatics. But the pattern is so common – particularly in the southwest - that I don’t think any lawyer could make anything of them. I avoid superfluous gadgets on general principals though.
I think many of our members on THR live in areas that are not controlled by rampant liberalism and thus may have little to worry about. But still, I see no reason for prudent people to leave themselves wide open. There are too many unprincipled legal sharks out there.
I think you have made some very intelligent choices. Everything you have, including the night-sights will pass muster because they are commonly used by law enforcement agencies. My pocket revolvers are either converted to double-action only, or are of the kind that has enclosed hammers. My larger ones are still “SA/DA†though, and I have arguments with myself over this. I may bite-the-bullet and convert a “K†frame S&W.
I can’t convert my single-action automatics. But the pattern is so common – particularly in the southwest - that I don’t think any lawyer could make anything of them. I avoid superfluous gadgets on general principals though.
I think many of our members on THR live in areas that are not controlled by rampant liberalism and thus may have little to worry about. But still, I see no reason for prudent people to leave themselves wide open. There are too many unprincipled legal sharks out there.
duckfoot
member
Would a stock gun make the bad guy any less dead, or a custom gun make a bad guy any more dead. Bad, DA "tricks are for kids."
A stock gun only aye?
"He used a Kimber,well know for being modified at the factory.."
Reguardless if the shoot was super duper clean,you'r gonna have problems,i would think.Here in Lake county Indiana,"you are guilty till proven otherwise,then we'll still get ya",yet just one county south,the attitude is 180 degrees.Best to go on your personal situation .
"He used a Kimber,well know for being modified at the factory.."
Reguardless if the shoot was super duper clean,you'r gonna have problems,i would think.Here in Lake county Indiana,"you are guilty till proven otherwise,then we'll still get ya",yet just one county south,the attitude is 180 degrees.Best to go on your personal situation .
English John
Member
Looks like..........
some of us get touchy when we hear things we don't like. I have followed the man's writings for years. I don't remember him saying to NEVER make a modification to your handgun, just make safe mods. Civil court has different standards, if I remember correctly OJ beat the charges in criminal court but still payed in civil court. Do you really want to try and justify your hair-trigger "terminator" handgun with the "devestator" ammo to the jury of little old ladies described above, especially when the lawyers are looking for your blood and money? Remember they don't go to jail or pay if you lose, you do. Even if you WIN, how much will your lawyer charge you? We would all spend $50,000 to stay out of jail, but how many of us can quickly lay hands on that kind of cash? Now tell your kids- "no college". I think that all the man was saying was don't make your own pitfalls. I carried a badge for 8 years, had my GP-100 converted to DAO and it didn't hurt my scores. Switched to a M1911, had it "cleaned up" with no mods to the trigger, and qualified many times with it no problems. I still carry Win ST because that is what was ISSUED, if you don't like hollowpoints talk to the sheriff. Is it part of your mindset NOW before a shooting to justify your choice of gun and ammo? Can you verify your training and proficiency? Of course this is America and you can do any *&$#@ thing you like, but are you ready to justify your actions to a bunch of strangers in court? Yes it is "better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6", but I think Ayoob writes about surviving the shooting AND the aftermath. YMMV Good luck. EJ
some of us get touchy when we hear things we don't like. I have followed the man's writings for years. I don't remember him saying to NEVER make a modification to your handgun, just make safe mods. Civil court has different standards, if I remember correctly OJ beat the charges in criminal court but still payed in civil court. Do you really want to try and justify your hair-trigger "terminator" handgun with the "devestator" ammo to the jury of little old ladies described above, especially when the lawyers are looking for your blood and money? Remember they don't go to jail or pay if you lose, you do. Even if you WIN, how much will your lawyer charge you? We would all spend $50,000 to stay out of jail, but how many of us can quickly lay hands on that kind of cash? Now tell your kids- "no college". I think that all the man was saying was don't make your own pitfalls. I carried a badge for 8 years, had my GP-100 converted to DAO and it didn't hurt my scores. Switched to a M1911, had it "cleaned up" with no mods to the trigger, and qualified many times with it no problems. I still carry Win ST because that is what was ISSUED, if you don't like hollowpoints talk to the sheriff. Is it part of your mindset NOW before a shooting to justify your choice of gun and ammo? Can you verify your training and proficiency? Of course this is America and you can do any *&$#@ thing you like, but are you ready to justify your actions to a bunch of strangers in court? Yes it is "better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6", but I think Ayoob writes about surviving the shooting AND the aftermath. YMMV Good luck. EJ
10-Ring
Member
Most of my guns have remained stock. The few that have been modified have upgraded factory parts in them.
blades67
Member
Because he preaches the same crap Aboob does.
- Status
