• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Justified shooting, modified handgun, CIVIL LIABILITY???

ryan7068

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2011
Messages
185
Location
Chesapeake, VA
Hey all. I do like to modify certain guns on occasion but not typically my carry guns too much. I have read around on the web that modifications (i.e. Glocks: low weight trigger, skull and crossbones emblem, night sites/lasers, certain ammo) have really opened people up when hit with a civil suit even after a justified shooting. I'd like to know how accurate this is and any examples. Thanks all!
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
You mean like painting guns pink? Or grips with your initials? As far as I have seen the only thing considered in civil suits is justification. OP maybe you have something that points in the other direction.
 

ryan7068

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2011
Messages
185
Location
Chesapeake, VA
So rather than get a membership to every single site and wait for admin approval and then get junk mail from everyone and their mother, I figured it was best to go to the more educated individuals at OCDO and ask if there was any merit to these claims. After all this site is here to educate.....at least that's what I thought. Thanks for your obvious lack of concern and your unneeded reply roscoe.
 
Last edited:

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
So rather than get a membership to every single site and wait for admin approval and then get junk mail from everyone and their mother, I figured it was best to go to the more educated individuals at OCDO and ask if there was any merit to these claims. After all this site is here to educate.....at least that's what I thought. Thanks for your obvious lack of concern and your unneeded reply roscoe.

First off in my opinion the ammo gun modification thing is a myth, there is no multitude of cases to prove it exists. The same as the gunfights at OK Coral Main Street America because people are allowed to carry guns. The laws are spelled out for when you can and cannot use lethal force, you could be swinging a Louisville slugger, if you are justified you are justified. You should not be looking for memberships to research if you are serious, you should be researching court cases. Somehow I have the feeling you were never serious.

If another person is injured due to a gun malfunction/accident/negligent discharge, whether the gun was modified or not the owner is going to face charges, and civil liabilities.
 
Last edited:

ryan7068

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2011
Messages
185
Location
Chesapeake, VA
Actually I am just unaware of the best way to research past court cases efficiently. I mostly just wanted to know if it was of any concern. Also, I wouldn't be asking if I hadn't attempted to find out on my own. And, I am quite certain there is nothing wrong with asking others on here if they have any knowledge from previous postings or research......or did I miss it somewhere in the forum rules?

Ultimately it was meant as a serious inquiry, but obviously everyone on here seems hell bent on giving a hard time. A little constructive criticism may be an order.

**I believe the argument is that you modified your gun in hopes of one day using it on someone and that you were a gun nut looking for a fight**
 
Last edited:

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
Actually I am just unaware of the best way to research past court cases efficiently. I mostly just wanted to know if it was of any concern. Also, I wouldn't be asking if I hadn't attempted to find out on my own. And, I am quite certain there is nothing wrong with asking others on here if they have any knowledge from previous postings or research......or did I miss it somewhere in the forum rules?

Ultimately it was meant as a serious inquiry, but obviously everyone on here seems hell bent on giving a hard time. A little constructive criticism may be an order.

Well you have been here a year or so, have you seen it brought up? Did you try a search? Sorry if I seemed course, but the laws are pretty clear on self defense in most cases. In fact there was a father who beat a man to death to defend his daughter, and he is not being sued for using his fists. The law allows you to use any means necessary if your life is put in danger. A few states do have restrictions on ammo type. In some cases where it was illegal to have a gun, and a gun was used in self defense the shooter was still found not guilty. A famous case in NYC, I do not know if he was sued or not, but don't remember any mention of it.

Most times also the individual gun is not made the example of scrutiny. The media focuses on things such 'auto' or 'assault rifle' and use the same basic pictures instead of the actual guns when reporting. Most police and the public would have no idea if a gun has been modified.
 

ryan7068

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2011
Messages
185
Location
Chesapeake, VA
people have been sued successfully for wrongful death while being found not guilty in a court of law or never being prosecuted. As stated earlier, I did search but found nothing with any base. Trial by error doesn't really seem like the best decision in these cases so always safe to ask.
 
Last edited:

wylde007

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
Messages
3,035
Location
Va Beach, Occupied VA
I think the only liability you might face is if it could be proven that your firearm had been ILLEGALLY modified (silencer, full-auto, etc) and then that would be a criminal FIREARMS charge independent of any civil liability, should the municipality choose to pursue it.

At least in Virginia, if the KILLING (or wounding) can be justified as self-defense, it doesn't really matter what implement was used.
 

ryan7068

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2011
Messages
185
Location
Chesapeake, VA
I think the only liability you might face is if it could be proven that your firearm had been ILLEGALLY modified (silencer, full-auto, etc) and then that would be a criminal FIREARMS charge independent of any civil liability, should the municipality choose to pursue it.

At least in Virginia, if the KILLING (or wounding) can be justified as self-defense, it doesn't really matter what implement was used.

Thanks wylde. Thats all I was looking for......any rational input as to the claims merit/ or lack there of.
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
Thanks wylde. Thats all I was looking for......any rational input as to the claims merit/ or lack there of.

That's just it there has not been any claims or suits brought by perps being shot with a modified gun. Now there has been suits when the gun owner has been injured by a gun from a manufacturer. And I would imagine if a person modified a gun that blew up in the hands of another would get sued.
 

wylde007

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
Messages
3,035
Location
Va Beach, Occupied VA
That's just it there has not been any claims or suits brought by perps being shot with a modified gun.
I suggest, then, that one could draw one of two conclusions from this statement.

That either 1) a "modified" gun has never been used defensively or 2) the person using a "modified" weapon in the course of justifiable self-defense has never been prosecuted for any criminal act.

And since there is no data to support either hypothesis, it is somewhat moot, is it not?
 

MAC702

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
6,331
Location
Nevada
I figure I only need to worry about it on the third or fourth shooting. I figure it will take them that long to figure out what the hash marks on the frame are for.
 

SouthernBoy

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
5,837
Location
Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
This topic comes up a lot on other gun websites. Check out glocktalk.com/forums and you'll find some current discussions on this. I have contributed a number of times on that site.

Several years ago, I posed just this question to an attorney here in Virginia and well know to this site. I asked about trigger modifications (because of some bull headed arguments on glocktalk). His response was (paraphrased), "The 800 pound gorilla in the room is not going to be any modifications you made to your trigger or gun but whether or not your use of deadly force was excusable".

Last year at one of this attorney's use of deadly force seminars, I asked the commonwealth's attorney for Loudoun County and a candidate running for that county' sheriff position if wrongful death lawsuits, or similar, are common against a victim after the victim has been found not guilty or no billed. Both said that they were not and that they couldn't recall any in Virginia. Doesn't mean you can't or won't get sued but our affirmative defense tends to negate such suits when the victim is deemed to have acted within the law.
 

user

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,516
Location
Northern Piedmont
You asked about civil cases, specifically, but there's a difference between civil and criminal that's important here. In a criminal case, there's the "finding" phase of the trial (conclusion: guilty or not-guilty) and the "sentencing" phase. Modifications will be relevant to sentencing. If you are found guilty of murder because you shot someone, then the fact that you modified the gun to be extra-good at killing people would be something that the prosecutors would use against you. It is not relevant at all to the "finding" phase, in my opinion.

In a civil case, there is no such dichotomy. The trial is all one thing. Again, if you did something wrong that you ought to pay for, then the fact that you modified the gun to be especially efficient at killing someone could be relevant. It could be argued that it was evidence that you were ready, willing, and able, and therefore intended, to kill. That would be relevant to the issue of damages, and especially punitive damages.

If you don't have a legally sufficient and good reason to kill someone, don't think about the gun, don't touch it, don't gesture towards it, don't refer to it in any way. Forget it's there unless and until it is really necessary to kill someone. And should worse come to worse, and that necessity arises, then don't try to use the gun as a negotiating ploy, as a tool of intimidation, or as a warning. While you can always change your mind and put the gun away, at the time you pull a gun out of its holster, you should already have a legally sufficient and good reason to kill someone.

In other words, at that point, you should be ready, willing, and able.

As Southernboy pointed out, the big issue in the case is going to be the fact that you shot someone. So if you don't have to dance around that issue or pretend it didn't happen, then you can confront the evidence squarely, readily admit the shooting, and be able to explain (with my assistance) why it was the right thing to do. In that case, the fact that you've modified the gun to be more efficient is completely irrelevant. It doesn't matter how you killed Badguy, what matters is why.
 
Last edited:

WhatTimeIsIt?

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2007
Messages
188
Location
$
I really can't see why legal modifications to your firearm would somehow make a difference as to whether or not you're justified in pulling the trigger. What matters is why you shot someone, not that your weapon had night sights, a lighter trigger pull, or some artwork on it. If you modify your gun to be more efficient, that is a good thing, as you should want the tool that you will use to defend your life to be efficient. Worrying that some prosecutor might try to use it against you to prove you were "ready to kill" is a waste of time. Making any tool you have more efficient should be considered a good thing.
 
Top