[bestseller92]

I see threads on other boards where people talk about disabling the magazine safeties on their P345. This is a horrible idea. Disabling a factory installed safety device on any handgun is a good way to land in court or in prison, should you ever have to use the gun for self defense. If you don't want a gun with a mag safety, buy one without it. I'd recommed a good used P97.

 

[sheepdog]

You have a good point-many of the experts agree with you-one of my favorite pistoleros, Mas Ayoob, is very adamant about this. There are two sides of this, as any coin. The side I adhere to is that when I have a gun-it is loaded at all times...no thought of a magazine in or out-and I would rather have a single shot than a club, so in my HiPower or in any other auto that I could, I would remove the mag. disconnect. My explanation would be that I was trained on the 1911, which will fire with the clip out-and my safety procedures include clearing the whole weapon-not just dropping the clip and hoping the disconnect makes the weapon safe....will it fly in court? Maybe-maybe not-but at least I'll be there to try it. Prison? Not for removing a disconnect alone. No "accidents"--no loaning of my guns-I'll take the chance-never was that good with a club. I agree with your choice of a P97 instead of 345-but not for that reason.

 

[gunman42782]

I also have heard from Mas Ayoob and others about using reloaded ammo in a self defense situation and lawyers using it against you, but have never actually heard of it really happening. I guess they could, but you know if you shoot someone they are going to put you through the wringer anyway. If it is justifiable it is justifiable. Screw the freaking lawyers! The Castle Doctrine laws passing in several states should more or less take care of any worrys about crap like that. No, it does not give you the right to do anything, but it does give you the right to self defense in any place you have the right to be.

 

[cavediver]

There is no federal law that requires magazine safeties, period. This whole issue has been blown way out of proportion as though there is a slimey lawyer waiting behind every tree if you were to ever use you weapon in self defense. If you are so concerned about modifications to your pistols then you had better not:

Polish the feed ramp
Polish the breach face
Change the recoil spring
Change the hammer spring
Use aftermarket magazines
Change the sights
Install lasers
Adjust trigger travel or pull

And the list could go on and on. These are things that many of us do. Why? We feel it makes them more reliable, easier to use, more accurate and thus SAFER if they are ever called upon.

Think about modifications that Vang Comp, Wilson Combat and others do to firearms. Heck, a Vang Comp Remington 870, which is a great improvement to the factory ones, has the stupid key lock safety replaced with the Big Button. They openly remove a factory installed key lock safety and you're worried about a magazine safety?

This is still a free coutry after all.

 

[RNettles]

Well said cavediver, well said...

 

[bestseller92]

Just to clarify, I don't think responsible alterations actually make a gun unsafe, but such can lead unscrupulous or ignorant prosecutors to make the argument that "This individual was so reckless that, to make his gun DEADLIER, he actually disabled a safety device the factory installed on their gun -- he was LOOKING TO KILL SOMEONE."

 

[sheepdog]

Yep-they sure will-you're right-between the prosecutors and the civil litigation lawyers-the perp was the easy part-but that's life-and I prefer life. I tell those who don't believe in self-defense and defending others---"I'm ready to meet my Saviour anytime He calls-but if He sends somebody else------they'd better bring a note."

 

[cavediver]

quote:Originally posted by bestseller92

Just to clarify, I don't think responsible alterations actually make a gun unsafe, but such can lead unscrupulous or ignorant prosecutors to make the argument that "This individual was so reckless that, to make his gun DEADLIER, he actually disabled a safety device the factory installed on their gun -- he was LOOKING TO KILL SOMEONE."

Urban legends abound. If this is such a serious problem then please provide a link to a recorded court case where in fact this was the case so we can all be enlightened.

 

[sheepdog]

Glad to see you up early this a.m.-come on over to the coffee shop and grab a cup with us!

 

[bestseller92]

quote:Originally posted by cavediver

quote:Originally posted by bestseller92

Just to clarify, I don't think responsible alterations actually make a gun unsafe, but such can lead unscrupulous or ignorant prosecutors to make the argument that "This individual was so reckless that, to make his gun DEADLIER, he actually disabled a safety device the factory installed on their gun -- he was LOOKING TO KILL SOMEONE."

Urban legends abound. If this is such a serious problem then please provide a link to a recorded court case where in fact this was the case so we can all be enlightened.

I don't have a specific case of a mag safety, but I do recall where a Miami police officer was charged with killing a perp (and ulitmately found not guilty), and the fact that he had lightened the trigger on his Smith .38 was used heavily against him.

 

[sheepdog]

The trend in shyster lawyers lately has been, especially in homeowners shootings, to try to prove that the actual shooting was an accident-cocked and bumped the trigger-gun went off when fighting over it, etc.-they can get money from that in civil suits when they can't in a defense shooting. If Joe broke in and I had him covered with a cocked revolver and the lawyer can make the jury think I stumbled-accidentally fired-they can get into my homeowners ins. co.'s pockets. That's one argument for not cocking a DA revolver in a person-to-person situation. The way you tell what happened is as important as what happened. If I had lightened my trigger, I'd say that I wanted better control of when the gun fired so that I could be more accurate and reduce the danger of a miss.....you know the drill.

 

[bestseller92]

On the AmBack forum, Massad Ayoob replied to this same thread, which I also posted there. He mentioned a case where this was used against a guy in court. You can read his reply here:

http://www.ambackforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=41503&start=15

 

[sheepdog]

How stupid that a gun not even involved in the altercation could be introduced in any kind of court-the Hi-Power was in the car in the glovebox and had nothing to do with anything-the defense atty. should have been able to make this clear-that's reaching waaaaaaaaaaaaaay out there....has no common sense application. The opposing attorney could have found any number of reasons to accuse the man of being reckless....I still hold my opinion-others can do what they want-I want a gun that will fire even if the mag's lost or ruined-a single shot beats no shot at all-and I'll be long dead before the kind of gun I like is all gone so let the next generation play with their disconnects, rings, keys, and magic spells-when I pick up my gun-it will go bang when I want it to.

 

[cavediver]

bestseller92</u>, your point is what?

The esteemed Mr. Ayoob (if it really was him since this is the internet and anyone can be anyone they want to be and say anything they want to say with the touch of a keyboard) could only refer to ONE case in all America. I repeat, ONE case in all America. He didn't give a date, didn't have a case number or defendents name and he didn't even state if the magazine disconnect was part of the sealed plea bargin. It would take a crystal ball to come to any conclusions from the post he made.

Am I now to conclude that this is PROOF that there is an EPIDEMIC of litigation over modified guns [?]

I'm not a 'betting man' but I think I'll take these odds any day of the week and continue to modify and improve the function and safety of my firearms.

 

[RNettles]

quote:Until some "Esteemed Mr. Ayoob" gets here, I'll be happy to stand in. My name is just Mas.

The guy posted this in his post... stating that he is not Massad Ayoob, that he is just "standing in"... meaning his post is worth a grain of salt.

 

[sheepdog]

That could have been him-he's dogmatic but really humble-and may have even felt that the questioner was being sarcastic-being dogmatic isn't very popular. Even if it was him-and he's one of my best-respected experts-just one story-just one poor defense lawyer-I'd have to smile at Mas and say "Well-we're safe for the next million cases--that was the one." Just doesn't scare me as much as pulling a trigger and not hearing a bang would. Some people don't sharpen their pocketknives either-mine'll shave ya'. I only know one expert who never made a bad call-He ain't here-yet.

 

[rman]

This issue causes the same response from me as carrying a concealed weapon without a permit. (Kansas doesn't issue until Jan 2007) I would rather be arrested and be sued than be dead.
Tom

 

[bestseller92]

Yes, it was Massad Ayoob. He posts at the AmBack forum regularly, as does Charlie Petty and several other known gunwriters.

 

[bestseller92]

My original point still stands: If you want a weapon without a particular safety device, choose one without one instead of disabling one on a weapon that has the feature. This is just hopefully helpful advice, and anyone is free to take it or ignore it.

 

[cavediver]

quote:Originally posted by bestseller92

My original point still stands: If you want a weapon without a particular safety device, choose one without one instead of disabling one on a weapon that has the feature. This is just hopefully helpful advice, and anyone is free to take it or ignore it.

Thanks for your concern, I choose to ignore it.