Browning HI power magazine disconnect

[Poseidon28]

Fiddletowns' first false premise

"(1) a jury in a shooting case in which the defendant claims self defense is almost certainly not going to include anyone with any knowledge of or interest in guns"

How in the world did you come up with this one? A jury is made up from a pool of people in that particular area. To make such a HUGE assumption just...well, you know about assumptions, and what they do to the assumer.

You constantly forget that you live in The People's Republic of Kalifornia. There are places where EVERYONE uses guns, and, you would NOT be able to exclude all people that have knowledge, or interest in guns. There are places in these United States where weapons are something you put on like shoes. Just because you aren't in one of those places doesn't mean they don't exist.

This is not a personal attack: The point is that what is true in Kalifornia may not or is not true in areas of Texas, Alaska, even in Kalifornia there are places where firearms are a way of life. Legal generalities that are attempted to overlay the middle of the United States from the Blue states on the edge just don't work.

Therefore, since your first premise fails, your second:

(2) making technical arguments to a jury with no interest in or experience with the subject matter is difficult; and

fails,
and, so does your third

(3) if you're on trial you have a bunch of potential problems, so an issue like a magazine disconnect muddies the waters and makes it more difficult for your lawyer to adequately deal with those other matters.

darrentxs is the difference between the subtle, but powerful indoctrination that occurs living in the PRK. Fiddletown, you have accepted as fact premise that do NOT apply to large parts of this country.

[gyvel]

This is turning out to be a great thread with a lot of very informative insights, so let me throw another curve into it:

Who's to say that I was the one who removed the mag disconnect in the first place, or that I had any knowledge of its absence or that I EVEN know what a magazine disconnect is?

[danez71]

No excuse. You, presumably being the owner, should know what condition its in. We're getting into negligent territory.

[gyvel]

But wouldn't that presume that I am being held up to a "higher standard" than is reasonable?

For argument's sake, if I am not a "firearms expert" why would I even have reason to be aware of the existence of such a device?

[gyvel]

OMG!!! What am I THINKING???!!!

This is the same legal system that awards $3,000,000.00 to a woman who orders hot coffee, spills it on herself, then sues because the coffee is hot.

Don't know how I could have been sooooo very stupid to think that there is any justice in "justice.":barf:

[Poseidon28]

First off, your wrong on the McDonald's case. They earned that.

As for "KNOWING" that the gun was altered, considering how many Hi-Powers were made without the disconnect, you might have a pretty good argument there. You might argue the former owner 'upgraded' it, or downgraded it, to the original specs of what ever model you pick, or so you thought.

You do have a good point, however. There is such a thing as industry standard in firearms, and, the presentation would go that by far the majority of firearms, though I actually don't know if this is true(Mas? HELP) come without a magazine disconnect. Therefore, since the majority of the industry does not use them, you were attempting to comply with the majority of the current thinking on gun safety.

McDonalds got whacked because they had literally burned people, 2 and 3 degree burns, with their microwaved coffee, over and over, and, disregarded any suggestion, or responsibility for their actions.

For a more extreme case of tort liability, think Ford Pinto. Ford's bean counters figured out that it would cost more to stop the Pinto from exploding then it would to pay off the occasional burned to death victim's family.

So, when they jury found out about such logic, and, going to pattern, the prior cases were admitted, that's what gives you a 10 million dollar verdict.

McDonalds had coffee so hot, and microwaved, it would go through the cup, and, when you opened it, you would get third degree burns from the invisible
steam that would come out when you agitated the surface of the coffee.

They had a bunch of lawsuits for burned throats, noses, etc. prior. Then some poor, 73 year old lady gets 3rd degree burns, in her lap and private parts, because she just happened to go to McDonalds, and, didn't know they were famous for scalding, scalding hot coffee. Jury has had enough, and, I'm sure the damage was around a half million for hospital bills. The jury looks at what McDonalds makes from their coffee profits, and, they pick a number that will get the corporate attention that they better do something about their coffee policies.

It worked.

[gyvel]

Quite frankly, if I were in a court situation, I wouldn't argue anything. If any prosecuting attorney asked me about a mag disconnect, I would just give him a blank stare, a small shrug and remain at a total loss for words. I would then tell the judge that I didn't understand the question or what he was talking about. It's a shame that it has to be that way, but I certainly would give no leeway to anyone who is trying to prosecute me and send me to prison, based on a petty technicality, for defending my own life.

That ploy might or might not work; I'm not a lawyer by any stretch of the imagination. I only judge things by what seems right or wrong based on common sense, not by how the law can be twisted to serve someone's purposes.

[danez71]

But wouldn't that presume that I am being held up to a "higher standard" than is reasonable?

Most people would think its "reasonable" to know if your gun has been modified.

If I was on a jury I wouldnt like it if someone said "I didnt know my gun had been modified"

Thats drifting the topic quite a bit from modifying a gun to theroretical and generic "what is reasonable".

[Poseidon28]

Industry standard is a torts argument, used to establish if the gun is suitable for it's intended purpose. Modifying an old design to be more current with what is now industry standard would be a way of refuting the issue of modifying the disconnect. It would be a way to establish credibility for the actions of the person with the Hi-Power.

It would run something like:

The industry standard for HiPowers is to remove the magazine disconnect. It's an archaic French design that has no place in modern firearms. Then you trot Mas out, and, he testifies that 99% of semi-auto pistols on the market now do not have a magazine disconnect, and, that is the industry standard. He then testifies that all police Hi-Powers in the last 50 years have the magazine disconnect removed, etc.

[gyvel]

The topic is really drifting out to left field and could go on forever. The poor guy that started it just wanted to know if his trigger pull could be improved by removing the mag disconnect, and the answer to that is still "yes."

[Poseidon28]

It's actually really sad that such a simple modification, that should have been done to ALL HiPowers is such a legal football.

The fact that people have become so afraid of their own government, and really, their peers, when they attempt, in the VERY unlikely situation to protect themselves, against someone trying to kill them, is a truly sad commentary on our legal system, and society in the blue coast states.

That said, I believe the thread drift does bring up some vital issues that do need to be discussed, and, it's nice to hear from such folks as Fiddletown, Mas, etc.

[gyvel]

"The glove doesn't fit"-O. J. Simpson LOLLLLLL!!!!

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by Poseidon28

...How in the world did you come up with this one? A jury is made up from a pool of people in that particular area....

Yes, and the prosecution will be doing everything possible to weed out anyone with any knowledge of or interest in guns (just as the defense will be weeding out members of the Brady Bunch). See post #105.

Remember that Harold Fish was convicted and sent to prison by a jury in gun friendly Arizona. The prosecution was apparently successful in getting a very non-gunny jury. Based on post verdict interviews with his jurors (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15199221/ ), at least some of his jurors were troubled by his use of a 10mm pistol and JHP ammunition. Those aren't the sorts of things one would normally expect to bother gun savvy folks in a gun friendly State.

Originally Posted by Poseidon28

...There are places where EVERYONE uses guns, and, you would NOT be able to exclude all people that have knowledge, or interest in guns. There are places in these United States where weapons are something you put on like shoes....

And where exactly are those places? Sure there are places where guns are more common than other places. But nationally, gun owners are still in the minority. And for more rural areas where guns are most common, a jury pool is likely to be selected from a much broader geographic area because of the lower population density of such rural areas. Inclusion of some urban or semi-urban areas, where gun ownership is less common, will be likely.

There are probably very few places where you could reliably count on getting a gun savvy jury. It seems Arizona isn't one of them. So do you really want to bet your freedom on getting a gun savvy jury.

Even if you live somewhere where there is a high proportion of gun owners, can you be sure that if you need to use your gun in self defense, it will happen there. People travel. People go to town. People travel to other States.

I have permits that allow me to legally carry a gun in over 30 States. I could wind up having a very bad day in the deserts of Utah or in downtown Austin, Texas. And I'd be dealing with vastly different jury pools in each place.

Originally Posted by Poseidon28

Therefore, since your first premise fails, your second:

(2) making technical arguments to a jury with no interest in or experience with the subject matter is difficult; and

fails, ...

Not at all.

First, as discussed above, my first premise does not fail.

Second, what you choose to call my second premise is independent of the first. It is true and a matter of common experience that it is difficult to explain something technical to someone who has no interest in the subject matter.

Originally Posted by Poseidon28

...fails,
and, so does your third

(3) if you're on trial you have a bunch of potential problems, so an issue like a magazine disconnect muddies the waters and makes it more difficult for your lawyer to adequately deal with those other matters....

How do you figure it fails?

First, if you're on trial, it's about more than just the magazine disconnect. A grand jury is not going to indict you solely on the fact that you disabled a safety device. And a prosecutor is not going to want to go to trial on that fact alone. You're only going to be on trial if the prosecutor has a number of arrows in his quiver -- enough to convict you. So you will have a bunch of problems.

Second, your lawyer will have to deal with each issue raised by the prosecution. The more issues your lawyer has to deal with, the more complicated your case becomes. And the more complicated your case becomes, the harder your lawyer's job selling it to the jury. You have, by your own pre-event choice, added one complicating factor -- the removal of a safety device.

Originally Posted by gyvel

...Who's to say that I was the one who removed the mag disconnect in the first place, or that I had any knowledge of its absence or that I EVEN know what a magazine disconnect is?

If you're being prosecuted and the prosecutor brings up a modification made to the gun, arguing that you bought the gun used isn't going to help you much with the jury. Either you claim that you didn't know that the gun had been modified, or you knew and used it anyway. In the former case, you look dumb to the jury; and that probably isn't going to do you any good. In the later case, there's a substantial likelihood that in the eyes of the jury you'd be pretty much on the same footing as the guy who modified the gun.

Originally Posted by gyvel

...if I am not a "firearms expert" why would I even have reason to be aware of the existence of such a device?

Why do you have a loaded lethal weapon if you don't know how it works?

Originally Posted by gyvel

OMG!!! What am I THINKING???!!!...Don't know how I could have been sooooo very stupid to think that there is any justice in "justice."...

But it's what we've got, and it's not going to be changing any time soon. And if you get caught up in it, it will have a profound affect on your life. So I think it's useful to try to understand it, how it works and how to arrange matters to your advantage as much as possible.

If one is required to enter the legal system, his rights and responsibilities, and his property and freedom, will be affected. Understanding how things work and conducting oneself accordingly improves his chances for a favorable conclusion. Ignoring how things work, increases his chances for an unfavorable outcome.

Don't make the mistake of assuming that the system is somehow defective. The system is, indeed, firmly rooted in history and fundamentally sound. The traditions of trial advocacy date back to ancient Rome. And our legal system has its foundation in the Common Law of England and is thus part of a legal tradition dating back some 500 years.

Yes, there are sometimes bad results. Those bad results do not reflect defects in the system. They reflect, for the most part, operator error -- a lack of skill on the part of lawyers or judges, not properly managing the passions and prejudices of a jury, or unwise pre-event conduct setting the stage for a bad result.

In any case, our system beats trial by combat or trial by ordeal.

Originally Posted by gyvel

...if I were in a court situation, I wouldn't argue anything. If any prosecuting attorney asked me about a mag disconnect,...

You will have been guided and prepared by your lawyer, to the extent and in the manner permitted by professional ethics. If your lawyer is good, and I hope if this ever happens to you that you do have a good lawyer, and if you are paying attention to him, you will be able to handle the situation just fine.

[Mas Ayoob]

The presumption that arguments such as the one under discussion won't be used against you in gun-friendly states has been disproven again and again. The Harold Fish case in Arizona, for example.

The one case I know of where a disconnector removed from a Hi-Power became an issue, occurred in gun-friendly Florida. With more than 20 years of shall-issue CCW permit availability, Florida only has 2.5% of the population with permits in Dade County (Miami area) and 3.5% in Duval County (Jacksonville, currently the state's highest crime area). No one knows what percentage of those folks are knowledgeable about the fine points of handgun design.

Thus, it's a safe assumption that no matter where you live, you're not going to get a jury of fellow TFL members.

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by Poseidon28

...The industry standard for HiPowers is to remove the magazine disconnect.... He then testifies that all police Hi-Powers in the last 50 years have the magazine disconnect removed, etc....

I pretty much doubt that you'll get that kind of testimony from Mas, or anyone else.

First, I doubt that there is any good evidence that it is the industry standard to remove the magazine disconnect from a BHP. I don't think that true at all. As I've already noted, Bill Laughridge at Cylinder & Slide is pretty well known as a competent gunsmith, and he offers a variety of tactical tune up packages for the BHP that retain the magazine disconnect. And as Mas wrote in post 130

Originally Posted by Mas Ayoob in post 130

...Can any of them point to a nation or a military or police entity which ordered Browning Hi-Powers without the disconnectors? The only one I know of is the German occupation forces, who allegedly left out the disconnector to streamline production after they seized the FN factory when they successfully invaded Belgium during WWII.

If the only national entity that preferred its Hi-Powers without magazine disconnectors was Nazi Germany, I don't think it would help the defense much...

Originally Posted by Poseidon28

...It's an archaic French design...

Actually it's not a French design at all. As Mas wrote in post 130

Originally Posted by Mas Ayoob in post 130

...the French did specify it. However, they weren't the ones who came up with the concept.

John M. Browning's first patent for a magazine disconnector safety was applied for in February, 1910 and granted a year later as Patent Number 984,519.

The wording of the patent application indicates that JMB thought it was an important safety feature which would prevent a common pattern of accidental/negligent shooting.

Colt put a magazine disconnector safety into their Pocket Model pistols, beginning at serial number 468097 on the Model 1903 .32, and at serial number 92894 on the Model 1908 .380....

Originally Posted by Poseidon28

...the magazine disconnect..has no place in modern firearms. ...99% of semi-auto pistols on the market now do not have a magazine disconnect, and, that is the industry standard.

That's certainly subject to debate. While most pistols don't have a magazine disconnect, calling it an industry standard is pushing things.

The new Ruger SR9 includes a magazine disconnect. Smith & Wesson still has a number of its 3rd generation pistols in production, and they incorporate a magazine disconnect. The Smith & Wesson M&P line of pistols includes a magazine disconnect. The M&P magazine disconnect may be left out at the request of an LE agency purchaser, but at least one agency, the New Hampshire State Police, has specifically required the magazine disconnect. So as I wrote in post 144

Originally Posted by fiddletown in post 144

...it is not by any means unanimous that a magazine disconnect is undesirable.

As I had mentioned earlier, a number of police agencies have, in the past, selected pistols with magazine disconnects as their standard service sidearm. Most recently, the New Hampshire State Police ordered Smith & Wesson M&Ps and specified that they be fitted with the optional (for LE) magazine disconnect. And California requires as of 1 January 2007 that any pistol to be added to the roster of approved handguns have a magazine disconnect.

So somewhere out there, there are potential expert witnesses who will testify that a magazine disconnect is a valuable safety feature....

[amd6547]

...And, to reiterate, the trigger on the average P35 with mag disconnect, is perfectly suitable for a combat pistol, as has been proven through decades of real world use in the toughest combat situations known since it's creation.

[Poseidon28]

Mas and fiddletown:
You don't need a 'jury' of gun friendly members. All it takes is ONE.

I'm getting sick of having the Harold Fish case trotted out every time to justify
this position. Come up with another case.

How about the current Florida case where the guy used a SA Uberti 1875 revolver to stop a bad guy from killing as many folks as he could, and, he stopped shooting when the threat was stopped? No charges even filed. Therefore Florida IS a gun friendly state, and, the grand jury didn't hold it against the guy for carrying such an antique, unique, non-mainstream, non-poly firearm. They had at least one logical person that recognized that when the Bad guy came in, put two rounds in the store clerk, in an attempt to kill him, that from that point out, ANY form of method to stop him was justifiable, even a SA Uberti 1875 clone. What about the lack of a safety device on that gun? NO transfer bar, now industry standard...

Where are these states? Let's try the states that allow suppressors to begin with:
AL, AR, AK, AZ, CO, CT, FL, GA, ID, IN, KY, LA, ME, MD, MS, MT, NE, NV, NH, NM, NC, OH, OK, OR, PA, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI, and WY.

There are 26 states that allow machine guns without any additional legal red tape.

And for more rural areas where guns are most common, a jury pool is likely to be selected from a much broader geographic area because of the lower population density of such rural areas. Inclusion of some urban or semi-urban areas, where gun ownership is less common, will be likely.

Why? If the trial is in Auburn county, the jury pool is from Auburn county voters, period.

My understanding of the magazine disconnect is it's a feature for law enforcement, to keep them from getting shot with their own guns.
My argument would be that guns designed for the majority, and, designed for the normal person, do not have disconnects, and, they are by far the majority of firearms, and, that is the industry standard. I would move it from a Browning Hi-Power issue to a general industry standard, evaluated by all semi-auto pistols, excluding firearms designed for LEO contracts.

http://www.fbi.gov/publications/leb/...eb.htm#page_15

What about the issues the above article raises? It makes it pretty clear LEO faces different problems from the average person. With nearly 50 officers out of 440 shot with their own guns, anything that would stop that from happening is going to be something that is going on a LEO firearm. It's also clear that the requirements for LEO firearms are different then the average person requires...

It also seems high capacity is a huge issue, considering the examples of bad guys sucking up lead, and not noticing it.

[Mas Ayoob]

Ah, Poseidon, where do I start?

It takes only one juror to hang a jury without a verdict, and force the defendant to go through ANOTHER hugely expensive trial. Your point?

You're sick of the Harold Fish case "being trotted out"? If you're sick of reality, there's always fantasy. But the Fish case IS reality.

Class III weapons don't have anything to do with it.

I'm getting a sense of someone who just doesn't like to lose an argument. That's all well and good for debate class -- and, sometimes, internet discussion threads are exactly that -- but Fiddletown and I have spent 30 years apiece trying to keep good people out of trouble in court, and have done so professionally in the real world, not as an exercise in theory or rhetoric.

Poseidon, if you're saying that you don't think it's right that this stuff gets thrown at honest people who fire in self-defense, the argument is done, becuase Fiddletown and I have both already agreed with you on that. Unfortunately, the reality is that lawyers who have no case but see a need to attack defendants DO use such BS arguments...and every armed citizen on TFL is a potential defendant who has a right to know that reality beforehand, and tailor his or her choices and actions accordingly.

By the way, the "Florida case" with the single action revolver that you keep referring to didn't happen in Florida. You say your understanding is that the magazine disconnect is a law enforcement feature? At the time John Browning patented it, law enforcement was not using semiautomatic pistols. Research first, THEN write.

Cordially,
Mas

[danez71]

You don't need a 'jury' of gun friendly members. All it takes is ONE.

But if you leave it alone.... All it takes is NONE.

Thats 100% better odds right there.

[Frank Ettin]

Originally Posted by Poseidon28

...You don't need a 'jury' of gun friendly members. All it takes is ONE...

Maybe and maybe not. And still, do you really want to bet your freedom on getting even one? And a gun friendly juror is no guarantee of a hung jury. Remember there are more issues than just the disabled magazine disconnect.

Originally Posted by Poseidon28

I'm getting sick of having the Harold Fish case trotted out every time to justify this position. Come up with another case...

Why? Because you don't like it? It's a fine illustration of what can happen in a supposed gun friendly state?

Originally Posted by Poseidon28

...How about the current Florida case where the guy used a SA Uberti 1875 revolver to stop a bad guy from killing as many folks as he could, and, he stopped shooting when the threat was stopped? No charges even filed. Therefore Florida IS a gun friendly state, and, the grand jury didn't hold it against the guy for carrying such an antique, unique, non-mainstream, non-poly firearm....

What does that have to do with anything? It has nothing to do with a State being a "gun friendly" state. It's an example of a good, clean defensive use of lethal force, with a bunch of witnesses and plenty of evidence that the shooting was justified.

How can you know that if you ever need to use your gun, your situation is going to be so clear cut.

Originally Posted by Poseidon28

...Where are these states? Let's try the states that allow suppressors to begin with: AL, AR, AK, AZ, CO, CT, FL, GA, ID, IN, KY, LA, ME, MD, MS, MT, NE, NV, NH, NM, NC, OH, OK, OR, PA, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI, and WY.

There are 26 states that allow machine guns without any additional legal red tape....

Are these supposed to be the states where "...where EVERYONE uses guns, and, you would NOT be able to exclude all people that have knowledge, or interest in guns...." or where "...weapons are something you put on like shoes...." (from your post #151)? Maryland? Wisconsin with no CCW permitted? Nevada with Clark County? Ohio with the trouble they've had implementing "shall issue" in Cincinnati? Pennsylvania with the anti-gun shenanigans of the mayor of Philadelphia? Arizona with Harold Fish?

You just haven't thought this through.

Originally Posted by Poseidon28

...My understanding of the magazine disconnect is it's a feature for law enforcement, to keep them from getting shot with their own guns. My argument would be that guns designed for the majority, and, designed for the normal person, do not have disconnects, and, they are by far the majority of firearms, and, that is the industry standard....

Pure fantasy. Historically, it's simply not true, as previously pointed out by Mas. And you have no evidence to support this conjecture.

As a matter of fact, the California requirement that pistols now have a magazine disconnect grew out of an accidental shooting. A child got a loaded gun. He thought he unloaded it by removing the magazine. But there was a round in the chamber, and when he pulled the trigger he shot a friend in the head. There is currently a case on similar facts going up to the U. S. Supreme Court challenging federal law barring suits against gun makers. (The underlying suit was against Beretta claiming that the gun was inherently defective for not having a magazine disconnect.)

Originally Posted by Poseidon28

... http://www.fbi.gov/publications/leb/...eb.htm#page_15

What about the issues the above article raises?...

What do articles debunking the myth of "one shot stops" and about substance abuse among LEOs have to do with the subject?

[Poseidon28]

Mas:
How many murder trials have you testified in?
Manslaughter?

Fiddletown:
How many murder trials have you been involved in?
Manslaughter?

As a matter of fact, the California requirement that pistols now have a magazine disconnect grew out of an accidental shooting. A child got a loaded gun. He thought he unloaded it by removing the magazine. But there was a round in the chamber, and when he pulled the trigger he shot a friend in the head. There is currently a case on similar facts going up to the U. S. Supreme Court challenging federal law barring suits against gun makers. (The underlying suit was against Beretta claiming that the gun was inherently defective for not having a magazine disconnect.)

Fiddletown:
California law is not rational when it comes to firearms. The liberal agenda is to use a smokescreen, like the one you have above, to do all possible to limit firearms and ammunition.
The no lead law is an excellent example.

[amd6547]

Mas and Fiddletown, thanks for your thoughtful posts on this subject. I made my decision years ago, and I will stick with it. I like my P35 triggers, with disconnect just fine the way they are for the purpose I employ them...self defense.
I really don't believe this thread should go any further.

[JohnKSa]

My apologies for not checking sooner. Poseidon28 is a banned member who has re-registered in violation of TFL rules. He won't be continuing this discussion.

[Mas Ayoob]

Tell ya the truth, Poseidon, after 30 years I lost count.

You can read about one Murder and one Manslaughter trial I was involved with in Roy Black's book, "Black's Law," available at major bookstores, Amazon, or your local library. I have a couple more Murder trials on my current active schedule, and more wrongful death cases. You can find some of them at www.americanhandgunner.com in the "Ayoob Files" section. You also have the option of a Google search. As I tried to tell you earlier, research is the foundation of debate.

But, enough about me...how many have YOU been involved with, in any way, shape, or form?

That's the way we do it in court, where those involved use their real names and all...speak for the record...sit on the witness stand with their lives and careers an open book for opposing counsel to explore...and stand vulnerable to criminal perjury charges if we BS folks, and would be humiliatingly impeached on the record if we made clear-cut mistakes like putting a case in a state where it didn't happen, or misconstruing an obvious intent of a patent. It's kind of "I research you...you research me" ...level playing field, and all of that. But all done with much, MUCH higher stakes for all concerned than an Internet gun forum.

A hint, young brother...argumentum ad hominem is a loser's strategy, and one you're definitely not going to be successful with in this particular debate.

[Frank Ettin]

FWIW, I've been completely clear about my background and experience. It's been discussed in this thread, and I've included, in posts earlier in this thread, links to other threads in which I've discussed my background and experience.