The Original CZ Forum

GENERAL => General Discussion => Topic started by: goishi on October 02, 2007, 07:38:37 PM

Title: Warning against trigger jobs for defensive pistols
Post by: goishi on October 02, 2007, 07:38:37 PM

My marksmanship trainer related some information to me today that I thought may be useful.  I was asking about trigger jobs for the P01.

A policeman friend of his killed somebody in the line of duty...  It was justified and no criminal proceedings ever came about, but he was crucified by the civil courts because he had a trigger job done on his duty gun.  Apparently lawsuit attorneys can make all kinds of accusations, and the standard of proof is less stringent than in a criminal court.  Even the gunsmith who did the trigger job got sued.

So, he recommended that I leave my P01 alone since it's a defense weapon.

Just something to think about.

Title: Warning against trigger jobs for defensive pistols
Post by: mpweave on October 02, 2007, 08:40:37 PM
Good call in the interests of CYA (but a decent civil defense attorney should be able to deflect such testimony as unhelpful to the jury on the question of negligence).

It's ridiculous to me that law enforcement officers, discharging their duty correctly and efficiently, are still held vulnerable to civil liability where the killing was justified. He should be able to sue the estate of the perp for harrassment and mental anguish for forcing him to discharge his weapon.
Title: Warning against trigger jobs for defensive pistols
Post by: mbott on October 02, 2007, 08:43:52 PM
This is something I'd like to read up on.  Can you provide a cite on the civil case?

--
Mike
Title: Warning against trigger jobs for defensive pistols
Post by: Walt-Sherrill on October 02, 2007, 09:45:50 PM
I've heard of these stories -- all anecdotal.  I'd like to see a citation to a real-world case, too.

It's a bit like taking a surgeon to court for cutting people with a sharp knife...
Title: Warning against trigger jobs for defensive pistols
Post by: goishi on October 02, 2007, 09:50:18 PM

As an exercise into legal research, I'm going to ask for the name of the officer and then try to dig for the court records.  This should all be a matter of public record, so it's just a matter of putting the nose to the grindstone.

I'll report back, hopefully with some PDFs of court documents and findings.
Title: Warning against trigger jobs for defensive pistols
Post by: mbott on October 03, 2007, 02:05:27 AM
Quote
Quote:
I'll report back, hopefully with some PDFs of court documents and findings.


Fantastic.

--
Mike
Title: Warning against trigger jobs for defensive pistols
Post by: Kevin Quinlan on October 03, 2007, 05:01:42 AM
Massad Ayoob has written about this in the past. He also cautions about using handloads in a defensive pistol for the same reason.
Amazon should carry his books, or maybe from his LFI training center.
Title: Warning against trigger jobs for defensive pistols
Post by: Unregistered(d) on October 03, 2007, 06:57:39 AM
If your state doesn't have civil liability protection laws, like AZ does, then absolutely keep your SD sidearm bone stock with the same brand of ammo your local PD carries.
  Az has a law that states no civil liabilty for justified conduct.
Title: Warning against trigger jobs for defensive pistols
Post by: goishi on October 05, 2007, 05:57:45 AM

Unfortunately my trainer doesn't want to give up the name of his friend who had legal troubles.  He said like it would be a betrayal of his privacy.

So, we're back to hearsay...  :/

Sorry.
Title: Warning against trigger jobs for defensive pistols
Post by: gldP01 on October 05, 2007, 06:44:54 AM
If you guys read Combat Handguns, Massad Ayoob had a great article a few issues back where he cited many cases that went awry for the justified shooter that had performed trigger jobs or lightened the trigger on their weapons.  I proved to me how hungry DAs and ignorant defense attorneys could cost a justified shooter his own freedom and money.

I will try to dig it out to give you what issue it is in.  No guarantees, I often keep gun mags in my "reading room" (bathroom) until the covers fall off.  I will look.
Title: Warning against trigger jobs for defensive pistols
Post by: Stuart on October 05, 2007, 11:40:13 AM
everything will come under scrutiny in a civil case..doesn't matter how justified the shooting..there its all about the money..not about innocence..

everything is defensible as long as you are  justifiable in your shoot.
and were not negligent.

your training will be called into question, do you compete, do you reload, what other guns do you have, etc..

if a trigger job makes the gun better for you too shoot and makes you more accurate..that is defensible...

no matter what happens..it won't be fun..
Title: Warning against trigger jobs for defensive pistols
Post by: Jekylltamer on October 10, 2007, 06:51:30 AM
I heard a similar story from my CCW instructor regarding handloads. I carry a PCR for PD. I recently changed my grips because I think they make the gun look better. I am a Virginia Tech Alum and had the VT ribbon engraved in remembrance of the victims of April 16th.

After reading this post, I feel like I need to put the stock grips back on for fear that the engraving could be misconstrued as "looking for trouble".

Any thoughts?
Title: Warning against trigger jobs for defensive pistols
Post by: Walt-Sherrill on October 10, 2007, 07:08:24 AM
Keep the grips.   (They do not affect performance in any meaningful way.)

Use of a handgun in a defensive situation should always be a last-resort sort of thing, anyway.
Title: Warning against trigger jobs for defensive pistols
Post by: Omega8omega on October 10, 2007, 07:51:42 AM
Quote
Quote:
I am a Virginia Tech Alum and had the VT ribbon engraved in remembrance of the victims of April 16th


Any pictures?
Title: Warning against trigger jobs for defensive pistols
Post by: Jekylltamer on October 10, 2007, 08:00:26 AM
(http://i242.photobucket.com/albums/ff175/Jekylltamer/P9040001.jpg)
(http://i242.photobucket.com/albums/ff175/Jekylltamer/P9040007.jpg)

These aren't the best pics, but you get the idea.
Title: Warning against trigger jobs for defensive pistols
Post by: Unregistered(d) on October 10, 2007, 08:24:39 AM
Very nice, both in spirit and design. Be proud of them, and carry them.8)
Title: Warning against trigger jobs for defensive pistols
Post by: Grendel on October 10, 2007, 09:00:12 PM
Unless and until someone provides actual cases where an otherwise legal and justified shoot went south in court because of reloads, trigger jobs, fancy grips or anything else, I call BS on this idea. I've heard any number of 'I know a guy who's brother got in the $h!t because he shot someone with his gun and it had blah blah blah done to it' anecdotes. All horse$h!t. An opposing attorney might try to use them as (ahem) ammunition for his case, but your lawyer and the Judge should swiftly deep 6 that ploy. There are no deadly force statutes written that include words such as: 'deadly force is justified unless reloads are used' or 'unless the weapon has been substantially altered'.

A righteous shoot or deadly force incident is justified no matter what you use be it hammer, shotgun, coal shovel, anti-aircraft cannon, AK47 or whatever else, provided, I repeat, provided you are acting within the law as it is written in your State. Commonly this is (with exceptions in States with 'castle' doctrines) that you must be in fear for your or another's life or of great bodily harm.

Civil or Federal court is a different kettle of fish, as OJ found out, but a good lawyer is your friend in all these cases.
Title: Warning against trigger jobs for defensive pistols
Post by: ccw9mm on October 21, 2007, 05:37:31 AM
The issue isn't that accusations can be made.  Any legal proceeding against you is one thing, and one thing only:  war.  The goal is to win.  Thus, anyone should expect the other side to do anything and everything to smear you, disqualify what you have to say or what you've done and, ultimately, to "kill" you in this war.  No surprises, there.  

A trigger job, per se, isn't a bad thing.  If expressly done to improve safety and enhance reliability, and documented as such, it cannot help but be perceived (at least in the hands of a competent attorney) as a good thing.  The gritty, creepy factory trigger on my P01 was cleaned up by Matt Mink.  I specifically requested the character of trigger pull I wanted, which was not materially different from factory, other than being smoothed and cleaned up, and set to a weight of pull more suitable for a defensive carry firearm.  At 7.5# DA and just over 4# SA, but buttery smooth, it's more accurate, reliable and safe than CZ ever thought to make it.  

Can a scumbag lawyer attempt to lever this into something it's not?  Sure.  If ever it comes to legal proceedings against me, I'd expect nothing less.  But, in the end, claims are only that.  This P01 is now more reliable, more safe, easier to use competently, less likely to have issues when my life is being threatened.  To claim removal of factory manufacturing defects (burrs and marks) and elimination of what was a hair-trigger SA action is the specific cause of anything has no basis in fact.

In this specific case, I'd be willing to bet the person in question didn't have competent legal representation.  That's too bad.  Doesn't make it a trend.  Doesn't make it likely to happen anywhere else.  It is what it is.