I hope the moderators will summarily move this to another forum if I've picked the wrong spot. But as it relates to carrying and staying out of hot water in MD...
One often reads admonishments against carrying, for SD, a piece that's been in any way pimped out. The idea being that on the remote chance you're ever before a jury because of the need to use it, a prosecutor or civil suit go-getter will use that to demonstrate your gun-nuttery and thus your obvious guilt in spoiling for a fight, etc.
I get it. That makes sense. Why provide any leverage one doesn't have to. But ... would one consider a set of improved ("night") sights to be dipping one's toes in that dangerous water? I've become quite enamored with the XD-E I've been carrying and feel precisely zero urge to fiddle with its behavior. But I installed some TruGlo TFX Pro sights (their combo fiber/tritium arrangement). My practical motivation: they really are easier to see in both bright light and in the dark. But my armchair legal theory: they're entirely about improving the safety of using the gun in a marginally lit environment.
Anybody with more than just my same level of internet-powered conjecture to offer up on this topic? Thanks in advance.
One often reads admonishments against carrying, for SD, a piece that's been in any way pimped out. The idea being that on the remote chance you're ever before a jury because of the need to use it, a prosecutor or civil suit go-getter will use that to demonstrate your gun-nuttery and thus your obvious guilt in spoiling for a fight, etc.
I get it. That makes sense. Why provide any leverage one doesn't have to. But ... would one consider a set of improved ("night") sights to be dipping one's toes in that dangerous water? I've become quite enamored with the XD-E I've been carrying and feel precisely zero urge to fiddle with its behavior. But I installed some TruGlo TFX Pro sights (their combo fiber/tritium arrangement). My practical motivation: they really are easier to see in both bright light and in the dark. But my armchair legal theory: they're entirely about improving the safety of using the gun in a marginally lit environment.
Anybody with more than just my same level of internet-powered conjecture to offer up on this topic? Thanks in advance.