# Facts about lighter than factory trigger pull liability



## GCBHM (Mar 24, 2014)

Good points made here. Pretty good read.

Facts About "Light Trigger Pull Liability"


----------



## Smitty79 (Oct 19, 2012)

If you haven't read this, you should.


----------



## neorebel (Dec 25, 2013)

Funny. I also have a book out. 1000 things men know about women. It's 1000 blank pages. ;o)


----------



## PT111Pro (Nov 15, 2014)

neorebel said:


> Funny. I also have a book out. 1000 things men know about women. It's 1000 blank pages. ;o)


Yea and so informative.


----------



## Goldwing (Nov 5, 2014)

Good read.
GW


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

This topic is a subject of frequent threads on glocktalk.com where Mr. Ayoob is a contributing member, though he rarely enters those threads. Since Glocks are among some of the carry guns most often modified to get that "magic" trigger, you can see why this subject is common on that site.

Some years ago I asked an attorney, who is well known to many in my state's gun culture, this very question; whether or not modifications made to the trigger of a defensive sidearm are going to be an issue should you have to defend your actions in a court of law. This attorney carries on a regular basis, is an NRA instructor, a member of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, and has experience in firearms-related cases. He is also a friend of mine and his card rides on my person every day. His response was,

"The 800 pound gorilla in the room is not going to be any modifications you have made to your gun, but whether or not your shooting was justified or excusable".

In my state we enjoy an affirmative defense. This means we admit to shooting the BG and would do so again under the same set of circumstances. It then becomes our responsibility to show that we held a good faith belief, based upon objective facts, that we were in imminent danger of serious harm or worse. Mr. Ayoob addresses this in his article by mentioning that the defendant could take that position as a way out. I am quite certain that the attorney I mentioned above whom I know would not take a case where he believed the defendant was guilty of something not resembling a valid self defense action.

My advice on the glocktalk.com site, and others, has always been to research the laws of your state (statute and case) and consult with an attorney if you have real concerns in this area. If you believe that your modified Glock or M&P or 1911 could work to your detriment, check it out. Just make sure the attorney with whom you discuss this has experience in the matter and is hot hostile to civilians carrying firearms for their defense.


----------



## GCBHM (Mar 24, 2014)

SouthernBoy said:


> This topic is a subject of frequent threads on glocktalk.com where Mr. Ayoob is a contributing member, though he rarely enters those threads. Since Glocks are among some of the carry guns most often modified to get that "magic" trigger, you can see why this subject is common on that site.
> 
> Some years ago I asked an attorney, who is well known to many in my state's gun culture, this very question; whether or not modifications made to the trigger of a defensive sidearm are going to be an issue should you have to defend your actions in a court of law. This attorney carries on a regular basis, is an NRA instructor, a member of the Virginia Citizens Defense League, and has experience in firearms-related cases. He is also a friend of mine and his card rides on my person every day. His response was,
> 
> ...


Very good points, indeed. I think the average shooter/carrier is totally inept on this issue, and has no interest in learning how to be accountable to society by doing as you suggest to research, talk to professionals with experience in law on this subject, etc. One of the reasons I decided to go with the VP9 over modifying my Glocks was b/c the factory triggers are cleaner on the VP9, without modification, but to be honest, I really don't have a problem with the factory triggers on Glocks. This is something I have worked to determine through countless hours on the range shooting, and although I do like a lighter pull, the standard Glock trigger isn't bad.

I think this is more of an issue on DA guns, especially revolvers. I think any DAO pistol, although modified, would not be scrutinized nearly as closely as the former simply b/c even if the trigger pull is lighter, it still isn't going to be a light as a cocked "hair" trigger of a revolver. It just isn't as likely to "go off". Interesting perspective, though. I respect Mr. Ayoob's opinions.


----------



## hud35500 (May 8, 2010)

It amazes me that even after Ayoob himself weighs in on the subject, there are still those on this forum who claim, "that doesn't apply in my state".


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

While Captain Ayoob's essay is useful and full of good advice, I beg to offer a slightly different view of the matter, based upon my own, um, arsenal.

I have a few M1911 .45s, which have been modified for target-shooting use. One of the modifications is that all of them have light (3.5-pound) trigger actions.

Were I to access one of these previously-modified pistols in an emergency, and, through necessity, use it to defend myself and my family, would their trigger actions cause me trouble in a court of law?

Would it be practical to affirm in court that these pistols have been modified, but were not intended for self-defense use? Is it, well, self-defeating, to grab one of these target-modified pistols in an emergency, and use it for self defense?

I ask for discussion from all. But I also ask Massad, since he comes 'round here on occasion, to add his own comments.


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> While Captain Ayoob's essay is useful and full of good advice, I beg to offer a slightly different view of the matter, based upon my own, um, arsenal.
> 
> I have a few M1911 .45s, which have been modified for target-shooting use. One of the modifications is that all of them have light (3.5-pound) trigger actions.
> 
> ...


It SHOULDN'T be self-defeating, but in a county where some think high-capacity magazines need to be thrown away when empty, well ..... I'll let you draw conclusions on your own.


----------



## GCBHM (Mar 24, 2014)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> While Captain Ayoob's essay is useful and full of good advice, I beg to offer a slightly different view of the matter, based upon my own, um, arsenal.
> 
> I have a few M1911 .45s, which have been modified for target-shooting use. One of the modifications is that all of them have light (3.5-pound) trigger actions.
> 
> ...


I would tend to think that in a situation such as you describe, it would not be as big an issue as if you carried the gun on your person, and inadvertently shot someone in defense. I think that is where the potential problems come in b/c as Ayoob points out, the issues come into play when there has been an unjustified shooting.


----------



## PT111Pro (Nov 15, 2014)

I have some range guns too that are not intended to use as self-defense weapon.

I use them on the range only and normally in the home they are locked up – always. 

My self-defense weapons are different kept. One (most a M&P Shield, M&P 9c or the PT 111) in a holster that goes with the gun into the safe when I am come home. Than I have home defense guns placed on different locations inside the home. There are not modified and different in size and caliber from a EDC gun. 

In a case of self-defense inside the home, the only place where I can normally reach a target gun, and I would grab the wrong gun ( if you could grab the wrong tool in a self-defense scenario ever) and shoot in self-defense an intruder. I don’t think it matters in that case.

I mean what’s the different between a fork or kitchen knife or a modified range gun in a self-defense case. I take what I can reach first and if the tool is modified, well – soo. I sharpen my potato knife every now and then too . You could call this a modified knife too.


----------



## GCBHM (Mar 24, 2014)

PT111Pro said:


> I have some range guns too that are not intended to use as self-defense weapon.
> 
> I use them on the range only and normally in the home they are locked up - always.
> 
> ...


Well, if you read the article, you would see the difference. It isn't a matter of what you (we) think, it is a matter of what a prosecuting attorney thinks, and introduces in a court of law. These things don't have as much to do with facts as they have to do with perception, and perception is reality whether it is true or not.

Like Ayoob said, once the idea has been introduced, good luck overcoming or defending it.


----------



## BigCityChief (Jan 2, 2013)

I own 40+ pistols, 19 of them 1911s. I've never felt the need to modify any of their triggers. Were I to do so, however, and lighten the trigger, I don't think this modification would be an issue in a justifiable shooting. I do, however, believe any competent attorney could make it an issue in criminal or civil court if, by chance, that lightened trigger contributed to my inadvertently sending a round down range, harming an innocent person, or shooting a not so innocent person when shooting wasn't justified.


----------



## desertman (Aug 29, 2013)

BigCityChief:


> that lightened trigger contributed to my inadvertently sending a round down range, harming an innocent person, or shooting a not so innocent person when shooting wasn't justified.


My sentiments exactly!


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

Many tend to believe or think that a lighter trigger pull will make them a better shooter or marksman. 

That's not always the case. Many have gone to the trouble to do just that, only to find out, nothing has changed. 

There's a ton of firearms accessories and gimmicks out there claiming to do this and do that. Some are relatively non-expensive, and some, not so much. 

When all the dust and smoke has cleared, most will find that the only thing they needed to do, was to get in more range time.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

hud35500 said:


> It amazes me that even after Ayoob himself weighs in on the subject, there are still those on this forum who claim, "that doesn't apply in my state".


I never said that. I only quoted what an experienced attorney in my state told me. I know this man, have attended three of the seminars he holds on Virginia law and the use of deadly force, and trust his position on this issue.

And I would still advise you to consult with such an attorney in your state if you have questions or concerns in this matter. That is going to be your best friend.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

GCBHM said:


> Well, if you read the article, you would see the difference. It isn't a matter of what you (we) think, it is a matter of what a prosecuting attorney thinks, and introduces in a court of law. These things don't have as much to do with facts as they have to do with perception, and perception is reality whether it is true or not.
> 
> Like Ayoob said, once the idea has been introduced, good luck overcoming or defending it.


If you live in a location where the county prosecutor has a history of going after those who have used a firearm in their defense, then you're going to have an uphill battle. In that case, I wouldn't touch my defensive sidearm. But I don't live in a county like that and my state has a very good record of not prosecuting the real victims of criminal actions. This can make a difference if you find yourself in court.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

There is a big difference between an accidental [negligent] discharge in the extreme anxiety of a deadly encounter and a deliberate shooting of an individual whom you believe is an imminently serious threat to your well being. In the first instance, you may have drawn your gun but hesitated in hopes that the perp will see your weapon and take off running. In your extreme condition, you inadvertently pull the trigger. You just opened the door to a criminal charge against yourself.

In the second instance, you draw your sidearm and fire until the threat is over. There is no negligence and no accidental discharge with this. You meant to do what you did and would do it again if need be. The pull weight of the trigger is not going to be an issue (unless you are unlucky enough to live somewhere where it could or will be made into one) because what you did, you did with deliberation and purpose. A three pound trigger is no different than an eight pound trigger with this case.

Commonwealths attorneys (district attorneys) come in all flavors and some are very prone to disregarding facts and overlooking justice in their attempts to win favor from voters and the press. If the shooting is obvious to the police when they arrive, they may not even take your gun (I'm sure this is largely going to depend upon where one lives).

At any rate, one more time, I encourage anyone who has concerns in this area to find out for themselves and not take too much advice from the internet.


----------



## GCBHM (Mar 24, 2014)

SouthernBoy said:


> There is a big difference between an accidental [negligent] discharge in the extreme anxiety of a deadly encounter and a deliberate shooting of an individual whom you believe is an imminently serious threat to your well being. In the first instance, you may have drawn your gun but hesitated in hopes that the perp will see your weapon and take off running. In your extreme condition, you inadvertently pull the trigger. You just opened the door to a criminal charge against yourself.
> 
> In the second instance, you draw your sidearm and fire until the threat is over. There is no negligence and no accidental discharge with this. You meant to do what you did and would do it again if need be. The pull weight of the trigger is not going to be an issue (unless you are unlucky enough to live somewhere where it could or will be made into one) because what you did, you did with deliberation and purpose. A three pound trigger is no different than an eight pound trigger with this case.
> 
> ...


I'm not sure anyone who really understands what the article is addressing disagrees with you, and I don't think Massad Ayoob qualifies as the "internet". I do agree that this issue will vary from state to state, but on the whole wrt to the subject of the article, as it relates to negligent homicide (meaning you shot someone you did not mean to shoot), it is best to not modify your triggers. As I said above, I think this applies more toward DA models like revolvers and hammer fired pistols rather than striker fire pistols, but for most folks, I do think it is best to just leave the pistols as they are.


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

paratrooper said:


> Many tend to believe or think that a lighter trigger pull will make them a better shooter or marksman.
> 
> That's not always the case. Many have gone to the trouble to do just that, only to find out, nothing has changed.
> 
> ...


Makes me glad my 52B came as stock with about a half-pound pull. Not that it will *ever* be used in self defense (well, it would make a great club, but it'd mess up the barrel float...)


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

It's probably just me, but I really don't mess around with a firearm. I take it as is, adjust to it, rather than make all sorts of modifications to make it conform to me. 

I learned this while in the military. It worked well for me back then, and it continues to do so to this very day.


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

paratrooper said:


> It's probably just me, but I really don't mess around with a firearm. I take it as is, adjust to it, rather than make all sorts of modifications to make it conform to me.
> 
> I learned this while in the military. It worked well for me back then, and it continues to do so to this very day.


Cheaper, too.....


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

SailDesign said:


> Cheaper, too.....


Only thing better than cheap......is *FREE*! :smt033


----------



## SailDesign (Jul 17, 2014)

paratrooper said:


> It's probably just me, but I really don't mess around with a firearm. I take it as is, adjust to it, rather than make all sorts of modifications to make it conform to me.
> 
> I learned this while in the military. It worked well for me back then, and it continues to do so to this very day.


Strangely, the other side to this is to sight in as you will be shooting. If you'll be shooting your hunting rifle standing, with only a sling, then sight it in that way to allow for your motions when firing. 
It doesn't matter how well aligned the sights are with the bore if you always pull it a little wnen firing....


----------



## Cait43 (Apr 4, 2013)

Do you really think the issue in a court of law is whether or not you modified your weapons trigger pull lighter than stock pull from manufacture? I think not...... The issue will be focused on whether you felt your life were in danger or not........ Say you used a bat to defend yourself....... Do you believe the issue will be the weight("trigger pull") of the bat or whether you used excessive force?


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

When it comes to courts and lawsuits, don't be surprised at what is brought up in court, or what might be left out. 

Attorneys will stoop to anything and everything, to assure a win.


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

Cait43 said:


> Do you really think the issue in a court of law is whether or not you modified your weapons trigger pull lighter than stock pull from manufacture? I think not...... The issue will be focused on whether you felt your life were in danger or not........ Say you used a bat to defend yourself....... Do you believe the issue will be the weight("trigger pull) of the bat of whether you used excessive force?


I believe that the issue Massad Ayoob raised had to do with providing the prosecutor with ammunition to be used against you in a trial, if it ever comes to that.

Gun modifications give the prosecuting attorney nit-picking material that can be used to influence an emotionally-swayed (is there any other kind?) jury against you.

Of course the weight of your pistol's trigger pull had nothing to do with whether or not you felt that your life was being threatened at the time. But a light trigger can be used against you by a lawyer trained in turning logical forensic argument into an emotional, negative portrait. It is a means of, as it is called, impeaching your testimony, and also of painting a mental picture of you as a cold-blooded "hunter," out to act as police, jury, judge, and executioner, all in one.
Thus, an otherwise-righteous shooting can be called into question, and you can find yourself convicted by a jury, perhaps not of premeditated murder, but of one or another rank of criminal homicide.

In your example of the use of a baseball bat defensively, although its "trigger weight" is not questionable, other factors are. For instance:
• Why were you walking around with that bat? Were you out looking for trouble?
• Why was the bat not of standard, baseball-game weight and dimension, but rather specially made as a murder weapon?
• Why do you keep a baseball bat at hand, right near your entry door? Are you looking for trouble, enjoying the thought of attacking anyone who knocks?
• Why did you beat him to death? Wasn't merely stopping his attack with one or two hits enough? And so on.


----------



## BigCityChief (Jan 2, 2013)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> I believe that the issue Massad Ayoob raised had to do with providing the prosecutor with ammunition to be used against you in a trial, if it ever comes to that.
> 
> Gun modifications give the prosecuting attorney nit-picking material that can be used to influence an emotionally-swayed (is there any other kind?) jury against you.
> 
> ...


Exactly!


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

GCBHM said:


> I'm not sure anyone who really understands what the article is addressing disagrees with you, and I don't think Massad Ayoob qualifies as the "internet". I do agree that this issue will vary from state to state, but on the whole wrt to the subject of the article, as it relates to negligent homicide (meaning you shot someone you did not mean to shoot), it is best to not modify your triggers. As I said above, I think this applies more toward DA models like revolvers and hammer fired pistols rather than striker fire pistols, but for most folks, I do think it is best to just leave the pistols as they are.





paratrooper said:


> It's probably just me, but I really don't mess around with a firearm. I take it as is, adjust to it, rather than make all sorts of modifications to make it conform to me.
> 
> I learned this while in the military. It worked well for me back then, and it continues to do so to this very day.


The reason I modify my Glock triggers, and I have done this to every one of them, is because for my carry and home self defense guns, I want as close to the same trigger feel and pull I can get across the board. And this includes my M&P's, and while their triggers are a bit different than my Glocks, their pull weights come in around the same.

What I am looking for is a pull weight in the neighborhood of five pounds and a general feel of smoothness in the first stage of these two-stage triggers. All of these guns do come in within six ounces of that mark. Some of the Glocks took more work than others because that is the nature of the beast. I have seen trigger weights of Glocks all over the page, in gen3 and gen4 configurations (gen3's tended to have a bit more consistency in this).

A great example of this was the M&P 9c I bought two years ago. It came in with an OEM factory trigger pull weight of over nine pounds... much too heavy for my likes for a defensive sidearm. It is now around five pounds seven ounces, as I recall, and has a very good feel to it.

So there you are. I am looking for consistency in my carry guns. Yesterday, I carried my gen4 Glock 19. Normally I carry my gen4 Glock 23. These two guns have nearly the same feel and weight to their triggers. That's what I both want and like. And that's what really matters in the end.

And once more, I know I have worn this out. If you are not sure how the DA in your area might view modifications to your defensive firearm, find out. If you have concerns about this, don't take chances, do your research and speak with an attorney who knows this subject well. This is what I did and I believe I am better off for having done so.


----------



## GCBHM (Mar 24, 2014)

SouthernBoy said:


> The reason I modify my Glock triggers, and I have done this to every one of them, is because for my carry and home self defense guns, I want as close to the same trigger feel and pull I can get across the board. And this includes my M&P's, and while their triggers are a bit different than my Glocks, their pull weights come in around the same.
> 
> What I am looking for is a pull weight in the neighborhood of five pounds and a general feel of smoothness in the first stage of these two-stage triggers. All of these guns do come in within six ounces of that mark. Some of the Glocks took more work than others because that is the nature of the beast. I have seen trigger weights of Glocks all over the page, in gen3 and gen4 configurations (gen3's tended to have a bit more consistency in this).
> 
> ...


I understand, and don't disagree with you. I don't think any professional would test one of your guns and say they have a "hair" trigger at 5lbs. But, and here is the main difference as I see it, you are not most people. You are a student of the game. You have studied not only ballistics and weapons, but also law. You have taken the initiative to prepare, not only with your tools, but your knowledge of law, and you know/understand that outside your prescribed territory, that law and those conditions change.

Most, however, do not. You have advocated that everyone do as you have done to educate themselves, but we both know that most will not heed that advice, and therefore, for them, Ayoob's advice stands more reasonable. Does that make sense?


----------



## GCBHM (Mar 24, 2014)

Cait43 said:


> Do you really think the issue in a court of law is whether or not you modified your weapons trigger pull lighter than stock pull from manufacture? I think not...... The issue will be focused on whether you felt your life were in danger or not........ Say you used a bat to defend yourself....... Do you believe the issue will be the weight("trigger pull") of the bat or whether you used excessive force?


Yes. The court room is not the arena of life. In there, supposition and perception reign supreme. On the streets, real life reigns, and that is the danger of it all, as Ayoob points out. Steve is right in that what Ayoob is talking about here is how we inadvertantly equip a DA to bury us, and most of the time we have no idea. We think in terms of truth. Lawyers think in terms of perception and what they can enter into existance for a jury to consider. Smoke and mirrors, as it were. Please do not be fooled into thinking that you cannot be painted as a monster when all you did is try protect yourself.

We hear things like "it all happened so fast", and that is b/c someone with a skill got hold of you and whipped you into a hot mess all b/c they wanted to either win a case or get the story. Their apology will be buried in the classifieds, but your perceived guilt will be front page news. Just ask Darren Wilson.


----------



## PT111Pro (Nov 15, 2014)

You're right GCHBM. The american justice system is not build on what right, wrong. Not even what really happen. It is a game of court of law, where judges, lawyers and other people playing career games. I read a statistic that said that nowhere in the world are more totally innocent people imprisoned than in the USA.
A trial of law in a courtroom is only for the ridge and famous in the nation. Average people have to take a plea bargain. First the DA goes to the judge and trows out everything what could prove your innocents. Let say you where in Canada after a plan e crash laying in a coma while the crime in Publa New Mexico happen. No one will ever know this fact besides you, your lawyer and the judge. No one else will ever hear about it. Once they have accomplished that, the DA and your lawyer make you a offer. 2 years by plea bargain or 25 to life in a court of law. Not a tuff question after all your prove and evidence is kicked out of a courtroom and no jury ever will hear about it. And by the way this fake plea bargain cost you the 5 mortgage on your house, the college funds of your children and every dime and penny that your church brought together as donations. If you not a ridge Football player or Actor out of Hollywood that can spend Millions of Dollars, once accused you have no chance. 

And now LEO here in the forum, tell me I am wrong. I always wanted to know what the excuses are that people have for such a system.

So what difference does it make if your trigger is modified or not? This question is highly hypothetical pretending everyone here in the forum could spend Millions and Millions in a court of law. The question is not if the trigger on a gun was modified or not. The question is, if the intruder or aggressor that threatened your life belonged to a street gang or a mobster syndicate that is protected by political correct rights of the liberals. If the DA and the Judge decides to bring you to court to play the game of plea bargains is important and not if you used a modified trigger on your gun.


----------



## SouthernBoy (Jun 27, 2007)

GCBHM said:


> I understand, and don't disagree with you. I don't think any professional would test one of your guns and say they have a "hair" trigger at 5lbs. But, and here is the main difference as I see it, you are not most people. You are a student of the game. You have studied not only ballistics and weapons, but also law. You have taken the initiative to prepare, not only with your tools, but your knowledge of law, and you know/understand that outside your prescribed territory, that law and those conditions change.
> 
> Most, however, do not. You have advocated that everyone do as you have done to educate themselves, but we both know that most will not heed that advice, and therefore, for them, Ayoob's advice stands more reasonable. Does that make sense?


Yes you make some good points. I have an interest in the subject so naturally I am going to learn a lot about it.... guns, their use, and the law in my state. I don't know if most of my friends who carry and shoot on a regular basis modify their carry guns. I do know one who does and he is one heck of a shot. I do what I do because it works for me. This may not hold true for others and that is fine. People should discover what works best for them, that which satisfies their needs and requirements in a defensive sidearm. And I support them in this endeavor.


----------



## GCBHM (Mar 24, 2014)

SouthernBoy said:


> Yes you make some good points. I have an interest in the subject so naturally I am going to learn a lot about it.... guns, their use, and the law in my state. I don't know if most of my friends who carry and shoot on a regular basis modify their carry guns. I do know one who does and he is one heck of a shot. I do what I do because it works for me. This may not hold true for others and that is fine. *People should discover what works best for them, that which satisfies their needs and requirements in a defensive sidearm.* And I support them in this endeavor.


Could not agree more! Unfortunately, many do not take the time to do this. But, we can continue to promote what is right!


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

This is interesting.

Montana man shoots and kills German exchange student Diren Dede, 17 | Daily Mail Online


----------



## GCBHM (Mar 24, 2014)

paratrooper said:


> This is interesting.
> 
> Montana man shoots and kills German exchange student Diren Dede, 17 | Daily Mail Online


Yeah, anytime you set a trap, to kill someone, you're going to jail. As you should!


----------

