Carrying: 100% pure factory stock? Stock-ish?

The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast

Member Benefits:

  • No ad networks!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • hogarth

    Ultimate Member
    Jun 13, 2009
    2,504
    The Prosecutors WANT you GUILTY. They want EVERYTHING to come in.

    I honesty don't care what the guy who gets paid well to come up with new material for their classes and blogs says. It is well sorted in case law. The opposing attorney may try and get all kinds of things in. If the force is justified it doesn't matter how it's accomplished.

    It's going to cost you a small life's saving regardless. If you need to pay an "expert" 500 dollars to come and testify that night sights or a dust cover didn't materially alter the situation or ill-justify the previously justified force then so be it.

    Okay. But I'm not going to contribute to your GoFundMe page because you have to drop a ton of $ (hint: it won't be $500) on experts and lawyers, all because you had to have a "You're F*cked" dust cover on your AR. This isn't BGOS. It's an actual case. Why spend $120,000 on a case when you only have to spend $100,000?
     

    StantonCree

    Watch your beer
    Jan 23, 2011
    23,932
    Okay. But I'm not going to contribute to your GoFundMe page because you have to drop a ton of $ (hint: it won't be $500) on experts and lawyers, all because you had to have a "You're F*cked" dust cover on your AR. This isn't BGOS. It's an actual case. Why spend $120,000 on a case when you only have to spend $100,000?

    It’s not an actual case as the dust cover is not going to be admitted as evidence the only place that dust cover helps you lose is the court of public opinion.
     

    jrumann59

    DILLIGAF
    MDS Supporter
    Feb 17, 2011
    14,024
    So I guess anyone with the "Molon", "Punisher", "Zombie", or other novelty lowers better think before shooting...
     

    K31

    "Part of that Ultra MAGA Crowd"
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 15, 2006
    35,632
    AA county
    The "better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6" rule applies. If it makes your weapon better to get the job done that is all that counts. If it's some cosmetic BS that's another story.
     

    Name Taken

    Ultimate Member
    Feb 23, 2010
    11,891
    Central
    Okay. But I'm not going to contribute to your GoFundMe page because you have to drop a ton of $ (hint: it won't be $500) on experts and lawyers, all because you had to have a "You're F*cked" dust cover on your AR. This isn't BGOS. It's an actual case. Why spend $120,000 on a case when you only have to spend $100,000?

    Bring it into evidence and don't spend 100,000 not getting the dust cover in.

    It is going to have the same legal outcome IF THE FORCE IS JUSTIFIED.

    Do I recommend putting on something as stupid as an engraved dust cover that's going to make you look like a fool on a firearm? Nope not at all. However in the context of this thread it is a recent and rather extreme example that proves my point.

    If you want to follow the advice of all the folks who make a living hyping garbage on the internet and their classes then have at it. But realize it is their opinion not backed by ANYTHING present in case law or legislation.

    If you had two AR's on the table and had to pick one in a shooting of another person of course you wouldn't pick one with a dumb saying engraved that's going to cause you a bunch of headache in court. But it certainly isn't going to make you GUILTY in the court if the force was justified.

    When you start passing this opinion off as fact is when you get folks asking about using hollow points, .45 insteand of 9mm, a Weapon Mounted Light, and night sights.

    It's all garbage and the force is going to be judged not the accessories or condition of your weapon.

    If you insist on getting hung up on "instructors opinions" then I suggest you watch some of Clint and Thunder Ranch videos. He has an actual understanding of use of force and isn't hyping a ton of personal opinion not backed by legislation or case law as fact.
     

    JohnnyE

    Ultimate Member
    MDS Supporter
    Jan 18, 2013
    9,460
    MoCo
    True. But as Mas Ayoob discussed in MAG 20, the prosecutors WANTED it to be admissible. Which means the defense attorneys had to spend time on it. And time = money, especially for those of us without a police union pre-paid lawyer.

    Nothing goes on my guns unless it improves functionality.

    The "better to be tried by 12 than carried by 6" rule applies. If it makes your weapon better to get the job done that is all that counts. If it's some cosmetic BS that's another story.

    ^^^Spot on!

    I've been an attorney for 30+ years, and my carry Glock is stock except for TFO night sights, and my ammo is either PDX1 or HST, never hand loads.

    Way too many folks jump immediately to the punchline: was he or wasn't the shooter convicted as a result of whatever gun modification/ammo he used. You never know why in most instances, as juries just say "guilty" or "not guilty." They don't give a reason(s) or explain their verdict. They just state the end result.

    What is seldom discussed is the expense, anxiety and aggravation that is a large part of the long and winding road that is the justice system. Defense costs go up, you wonder where each particular line of inquiry will lead, and you wonder how it will turn out. That can take months. I am sure Frosh has caused many an ulcer without getting a conviction.

    I also fail to understand the binary mindset of some who simply state "a good shoot is a good shoot." Often times in the law, it is very complicated making that determination. For instance, if the distance to the target matters in a case regarding whether the shooter had a reasonable belief his life was in jeopardy, and he used hand loads, it would be more complicated (read: expensive and anxiety-provoking) determining the meaning of the gunshot residue on the bad guy. Why go through that?

    There are countless other circumstances that could cloud at best, or worse cast doubt on, the facts of the case or somehow impugn someone's integrity or motive. Some decisions come down to a 51/49 choice for the prosecutor/judge/jury. I want every ounce of benefit on my side.
     

    Name Taken

    Ultimate Member
    Feb 23, 2010
    11,891
    Central
    ^^^Spot on!

    I've been an attorney for 30+ years, and my carry Glock is stock except for TFO night sights, and my ammo is either PDX1 or HST, never hand loads.

    Way too many folks jump immediately to the punchline: was he or wasn't the shooter convicted as a result of whatever gun modification/ammo he used. You never know why in most instances, as juries just say "guilty" or "not guilty." They don't give a reason(s) or explain their verdict. They just state the end result.

    What is seldom discussed is the expense, anxiety and aggravation that is a large part of the long and winding road that is the justice system. Defense costs go up, you wonder where each particular line of inquiry will lead, and you wonder how it will turn out. That can take months. I am sure Frosh has caused many an ulcer without getting a conviction.

    I also fail to understand the binary mindset of some who simply state "a good shoot is a good shoot." Often times in the law, it is very complicated making that determination. For instance, if the distance to the target matters in a case regarding whether the shooter had a reasonable belief his life was in jeopardy, and he used hand loads, it would be more complicated (read: expensive and anxiety-provoking) determining the meaning of the gunshot residue on the bad guy. Why go through that?

    There are countless other circumstances that could cloud at best, or worse cast doubt on, the facts of the case or somehow impugn someone's integrity or motive. Some decisions come down to a 51/49 choice for the prosecutor/judge/jury. I want every ounce of benefit on my side.

    Where do you draw the line? Should I use a 9mm because a .45 is larger and might be more deadly? How about in the home if I have a .22 or a 12G shotgun. Do I have to use the 10/22 because it is likely to be less lethal than the 12G?

    Obviously when you take it to the extreme it makes no sense. Would anyone want a dust cover with a dumb saying on it in a trial? Of course not. But when folks start using it to say night sights, triggers, or a hand load might change the outcome of the case I find that silly and when I ask for any case law where it mattered or legislation backing the opinion there's nothing.
     

    StantonCree

    Watch your beer
    Jan 23, 2011
    23,932
    My dust cover is two fat chicks because I’m highlighting body image self awareness and acceptance


    Not sure how this is helpful or relevant but i support things so I’m important
     

    1ceman

    Active Member
    Dec 26, 2013
    592
    I recommend reading "The law of Self Defense" for anyone who carries. The lawyer who helped me get my DC carry (and was involved in Heller) recommends his students read this.


    self defense.jpg
     

    jonnyl

    Ultimate Member
    Sep 23, 2009
    5,969
    Frederick
    Everyone falls within their own comfort level on the spectrum. Personally, I've never hesitated to change sights, swap for grippier grips, smooth out a trigger, etc... But I think those things are apples and oranges to having "Smile - wait for flash" engraved on the front of my muzzle device.
     

    callidus

    Active Member
    May 21, 2013
    111
    Maryland
    They've tried to throw the proverbial book at people for all kinds of things - I don't know that it's ever stuck but I also don't want to be the first case where it does. Replacing factory sights isn't usually considered risky - especially if it helps you see the actual sights. Replacing the "stock" trigger with a flashy aftermarket "hair" trigger may be, however, and doing things like painting/sticking "punisher" skulls and the like on your carry gun would not be the brightest idea.
     

    Users who are viewing this thread

    Latest posts

    Forum statistics

    Threads
    274,917
    Messages
    7,258,612
    Members
    33,348
    Latest member
    Eric_Hehl

    Latest threads

    Top Bottom