Modified Shotgun Liability When Used

Gary H · November 19, 2000, 11:54 AM

I know that this might belong in legal, but all of you are here.

Should you ever need to use your shotgun, wouldn't the prosecutor try to make hay with your sidesaddle, tac-light and so on. My Carbon 15 (wicked looking) sits in my gun safe for that reason and yet I have modified my 870.

Now, it seems to me that anyone with an obviously modified shotgun really needs to compete with the gun to blunt this approach. Is this reasonable and does it blunt a prosecutor's zeal?

Dave McC · November 19, 2000, 12:11 PM

A coupla things....

First, a prosecutor may not be anti gun. Our local DSA is an ex cop, with a history of gun ownership,and more sense than most. If it was a justified shooting, no problem.

Second, my HD shotgun is a Wingmaster, not a Persuader, Terminator, etc, nor does it have a bayonet lug, grenade launcher,and so on. It's also the duty weapon for my old agency, and I've lots of DOCUMENTED training with same.

As for the mods, all have been done to make the weapon more reliable, safer, and effective at extreme close range if I or my family's attacked w/o endangering neighbors and bystanders. Most parallel recommmended and adopted changes in PD weapons for the same reasons. The literature in the field suggests and recommends same for the above reasons.

Gary H · November 19, 2000, 12:25 PM

I live in an area that is very PC. More than 64% voted for Gore and the DA's office is very political. I will soon be moving closer to work where 70% voted for Gore. This is the root of my concern. Of course, I could live in Palm Beach, which, by the end of the handcount, 105% will have voted for Gore. Numbers quoted are from cnn.com

Sport · November 19, 2000, 12:31 PM

I've asked this question of
three assistant d.a.s in
two geographically different
parts of the country.
Their responses were that their
decision on whether or not to
prosecute a shooting case was
based upon the circumstances
of the incident. The type of firearm
and modifications to it were not
considered unless the firearm was
somehow illegal or illegaly owned.

Every one of my defense guns has been modified
to some degree. I've also taken classes with
every one of them and will continue to do so,

You and I think alike on the question of proficiency.
If one can demonstrate that with ones' firearm,
then legal modifications to the weapon should be
justifiable in any court.

I know some gun experts feel differently. That's why
I posed the question to the prosecutors who are
involved in making these thypes of decisions.

November 19, 2000, 11:54 AM	#1
Gary H Senior Member Join Date: April 26, 2000 Location: Texas Posts: 2,267	I know that this might belong in legal, but all of you are here. Should you ever need to use your shotgun, wouldn't the prosecutor try to make hay with your sidesaddle, tac-light and so on. My Carbon 15 (wicked looking) sits in my gun safe for that reason and yet I have modified my 870. Now, it seems to me that anyone with an obviously modified shotgun really needs to compete with the gun to blunt this approach. Is this reasonable and does it blunt a prosecutor's zeal?

November 19, 2000, 12:11 PM	#2
Dave McC Staff In Memoriam Join Date: October 13, 1999 Location: Columbia, Md, USA Posts: 8,811	A coupla things.... First, a prosecutor may not be anti gun. Our local DSA is an ex cop, with a history of gun ownership,and more sense than most. If it was a justified shooting, no problem. Second, my HD shotgun is a Wingmaster, not a Persuader, Terminator, etc, nor does it have a bayonet lug, grenade launcher,and so on. It's also the duty weapon for my old agency, and I've lots of DOCUMENTED training with same. As for the mods, all have been done to make the weapon more reliable, safer, and effective at extreme close range if I or my family's attacked w/o endangering neighbors and bystanders. Most parallel recommmended and adopted changes in PD weapons for the same reasons. The literature in the field suggests and recommends same for the above reasons.

November 19, 2000, 12:25 PM	#3
Gary H Senior Member Join Date: April 26, 2000 Location: Texas Posts: 2,267	I live in an area that is very PC. More than 64% voted for Gore and the DA's office is very political. I will soon be moving closer to work where 70% voted for Gore. This is the root of my concern. Of course, I could live in Palm Beach, which, by the end of the handcount, 105% will have voted for Gore. Numbers quoted are from cnn.com

November 19, 2000, 12:31 PM	#4
Sport Senior Member Join Date: October 4, 1999 Posts: 317	I've asked this question of three assistant d.a.s in two geographically different parts of the country. Their responses were that their decision on whether or not to prosecute a shooting case was based upon the circumstances of the incident. The type of firearm and modifications to it were not considered unless the firearm was somehow illegal or illegaly owned. Every one of my defense guns has been modified to some degree. I've also taken classes with every one of them and will continue to do so, You and I think alike on the question of proficiency. If one can demonstrate that with ones' firearm, then legal modifications to the weapon should be justifiable in any court. I know some gun experts feel differently. That's why I posed the question to the prosecutors who are involved in making these thypes of decisions.