CZ Shadow 2 Carry

[Pathfinder2041]

Shot my Shadow 2 carry again today and have accumulated 250 rounds through the pistol.  Made my first modification and installed a Shield RMSc RDS and love it.  I’m going back to the range for a few hundred more rounds through the pistol and zero the RDS.  Working on my cure for the “low and left” curse for a right hand shooter.

I have a “new to me” SP 01 to pick up after my vacation and have already ordered a CGW Pro kit to install on the safety only pistol.  I promised myself to put over 1K rounds through the carry before modification.  I’m hesitant to modify an EDC pistol in case I ever used it for personal protection.  Really digging the carry and have a choice to make on holsters, and there are so many to choose from. 

[Wobbly]

I’m hesitant to modify an EDC pistol in case I ever used it for personal protection. 

If your actions are legally justified, then you don't need to worry about the condition or setup of the handgun. The rumor that supports that is internet lore and has never been used in a court of law.

[Motorcop]

If that is true Wobbly why are almost all law enforcement agencies death on doing ANY modifications to a service firearm other than what the factory authorizes?  Common sense rules the day in this area and unless you desire to be a Beta tester in front of a 12 person jury go ahead and modify away.  There are thousands of legal cases that go forth in this country every day and I certainly don't want to be "that guy" who has modified his EDC weapon and then has to explain his mechanical abilities, firearms training and reasons for altering his firearm to a judge and/or jury.  Just because you have never seen or heard of a case involving a modified firearm going into court doesn't mean one hasn't.  Think they checked over the firearm and capabilities of the armorer in the Baldwin case?  Fortunately for me I was never called into court to testify about the care I rendered on department firearms after an officer involved shooting, but I knew guys that did.  They did not find it a pleasant experience at all.  I was taught early on that anything I did on a firearm had to be recorded in a work log including a safety check along with the reason for doing the work.  As a result of my experience I will NOT carry a modified firearm for EDC purposes.  Really good attorneys let nothing slip thru the cracks.  I don't make enough money in retirement to support myself let alone several others.

Rick H.

[Pathfinder2041]

If your actions are legally justified, then you don't need to worry about the condition or setup of the handgun. The rumor that supports that is internet lore and has never been used in a court of law.

The problem is where I currently live in Washington state.  If i had a stolen Glock 17 with a trigger switch, I might walk with classless bail and never show up to trial.  Being a citizen, if I clear gun leather on a baddie and have to pull the trigger, I dont want to put blood in the water for the DA to hem me up for homicide or the baddies family to go aver me in a civil case.  I respect your opinion, I just want to do as little as possible to get the city/state/county ready to tear me a new ass.

BTW, the RMSc shield 4 moa RDS is the cats pajamas on this pistol.  Would gladly recommend one to any user.

[Mods fixed quote]

[Crawl]

If that is true Wobbly why are almost all law enforcement agencies death on doing ANY modifications to a service firearm other than what the factory authorizes?

Your premise is that agencies are making informed decisions based on the all the valid data. The evidence doesn't seem to support it.

If agency decisions are a valid measuring stick, then why do they mandate things like the use of Hornady TAP ammo and the same zero for all rifles?

Wobbly is correct that it hasn't been a problem in the courts thus far. The decision process of agencies is not the same as that of individuals.

[SI VIS PACEM PARRABELLUM]

And here it is again. The dreaded "DON'T MOD YOUR CARRY GUN" thread. Always such fun when this shows up. Please someone show a single case where a civilian was prosecuted for a justified shooting using a "modded" firearm.
Every gun I own is modded and every gun I carry is modded and I don't own any pearls to clutch so I'm just not worried about it.

[Pathfinder2041]

Boo, you do you…OK? 

[SI VIS PACEM PARRABELLUM]

Boo, you do you…OK?

Oh you don't like my opinionated rebuttal to your opinion? Well such is life. The fact is you can find a thread discussing this subject on EVERY gun forum in the country but the one thing you can't find is anyone who can post an actual factual court case where someone was prosecuted for a justifiable or even unjustifiable use of deadly force with a modified firearm. The use of force is either justified or it isn't. Wobbly is correct and this is nothing more than internet lore and misinformation. If you post things you can't back up then you'll get pushback.

[Motorcop]

I like "push back" SVPP.  It makes one think about their convictions and decisions.  Just because we haven't heard thru the grapevine of someone going down the legal road of firearms modifications after a use of force situation doesn't mean it hasn't happened.  It just means we haven't heard about it....yet.  Certainly you are aware of the fact you WILL lose your firearm after being involved in a shooting.  Not much to worry about if you were carrying a stock Glock, but do you want to lose your $3500 dollar custom gun?  Depending on where the case goes and the prosecutors ambition in the case, the firearm will undergo forensic examination.  We have seen this in the Baldwin case in New Mexico.  They went thru that pistol so much so that it was rendered destroyed afterwards.  So much for getting the pistol back.

Remember too that what whatever you have done to your firearm will be discovered and brought up in open court.  The hope of the prosecution is to establish that if you have altered your firearm you must be some kind of a nut job just waiting for the right time to shoot someone and God Forbid it was an innocent person or child.  Also open to inspection will be your firearms training, including decision making scenarios and qualification scores, but I digress.  This is a discussion about mods to a carry gun.

Simply put after all my time in law enforcement if I decide to carry a firearm I don't want to have to contend with anyone making a claim that I altered my firearm to make it easier to shoot which is why people usually modify their firearms is it not?  I don't want to have to explain to a group of 12 people who no doubt know little to nothing about firearms, why I altered my handgun from factory stock configuration.  Clearly I have no burning desire to be a courtroom Beta Tester in this regard.  If I have any say at all in my case, I want it centered on the actions I took and my reasoning for doing what I did, not on any modifications I made to my firearm.

If others see it differently that's fine with me.  If you don't care about losing your $3K Staccato to an evidence locker and mechanical inspection that's fine too.  I just see things differently than you do.  But if your firearm has been modified in any way you have just given the prosecution or plaintiff a lot more "ammunition" to work with.  A jury is a funny animal to figure out.

Rick H.

[SI VIS PACEM PARRABELLUM]

HOHUM this is a waste of time and bandwidth. Cite the case or drop it.

[Crawl]

If there was case law deciding on the issue, nearly every 2A YouTube lawyer would be posting videos of it within 24 hours.

[Wobbly]

• A lawyer on The High Road did a case search on the Nexis legal database looking for any hint of this ever being used and could not find even one.

• Massad Ayoob, police detective, self-defense instructor and gun writer once made a comment that an over-zealous DA might use a shooter's modified ammunition or a modified gun as the basis for a legal case... And once the internet got a hold of this, then it suddenly became fact.

[SI VIS PACEM PARRABELLUM]

• A lawyer on The High Road did a case search on the Nexis legal database looking for any hint of this ever being used and could not find even one.

• Massad Ayoob, police detective, self-defense instructor and gun writer once made a comment that an over-zealous DA might use a shooter's modified ammunition or a modified gun as the basis for a legal case... And once the internet got a hold of this, then it suddenly became fact.

I wasn't going to give Ayoob the air time posting that he started this nonsense but yep he is the one to blame. He's always been a bomb thrower of things like this and he has vids discussing it. Some guys flock to him like Rosie O'donell running after the desert cart. He keeps these guys wringing their hands needlessly with his crap. He also works as a paid witness today so that say alot too.

[Crawl]

If we're on the topic of dumb advice, all those agencies out there getting trading from the IDF, and various other groups in Israel, are learning room clearing techniques from agencies who work in a place that builds houses with cinder blocks...more or less ballistically-sound walls. It is getting SWAT guys killed because limited penetration techniques simply don't work in a place where bullets go through everything.

Just a really specific example of expert bias, and most of us don't know any better.

The fact is, modifying your pistol hasn't yet been an issue in any court case. Making the trigger worse makes you more likely to make a bad shot and hit something you didn't want to hit. #liability

A single, well-placed shot decreases risk far more than a firing pin block or an OEM pistol.