SD with a *modified* weapon?

[Bolster]

What's the current thinking on carrying a modified or customized firearm for SD? Is it still conventional wisdom that, if you carry, it's best to carry an absolutely stock SD weapon? Decades ago I'd heard that, after an SD event, lawyers would imply that any modifications to a firearm indicated a "bad actor" who was "trigger-happy" and "looking for trouble." Still the case for firearms? Does it also apply to knives? What's the current thinking on this?

(Lucille...a modified weapon...just kidding, obviously modifications with barbed wire are a bad idea.)

[MacLaren]

Imo, it simply comes down to whether you were in the right or the wrong under the law and it's very simple - if your defending yourself from deadly force or even defending another from deadly force then your covered
If it's any bit sketchy about why you did then that's of course a different story

[shunsui]

If you carry a stock gun like a plain S&W revolver when you own semi autos or modified race guns, the lawyer will ask you why you need a special gun for murdering people. There's no end to legal debate.

[Mk-211]

The process is the punishment!

A DA will not only question your carry gun, but will also question your ammo choice.

Why did you need to use R.I.P. ammo? Black Talon, Glaser!!! You must've wanted to kill people, didn't you?!

[zhyla]

It only matters if it isn’t an obviously good shoot.

If you’re involved in a marginal encounter and your Glock has “SMILE WAIT FOR FLASH” engraved on the nose, you’re likely giving the DA enough to have a chance of conviction if they think you’re the guilty party.

Performance tweaks to enhance its effectiveness in a defensive encounter are probably safe. You just don’t want to appear to be looking for a fight.

And for goodness sake, avoid a fight.

[Doc Dan]

It depends entirely upon where you live and who's in power.

[Co Pilot]

What's the current thinking on carrying a modified or customized firearm for SD? Is it still conventional wisdom that, if you carry, it's best to carry an absolutely stock SD weapon? Decades ago I'd heard that, after an SD event, lawyers would imply that any modifications to a firearm indicated a "bad actor" who was "trigger-happy" and "looking for trouble." Still the case for firearms? Does it also apply to knives? What's the current thinking on this?

(Lucille...a modified weapon...just kidding, obviously modifications with barbed wire are a bad idea.)

The person who spoke, and speaks most about this is Massad Ayoob. In the past he has definitely said certain modifications and even names of guns COULD be used against you. Mas has a few current books out on use of force which are MUST reads if you even consider using a weapon , or not, defending yourself. Andrew Branca, who's an attorney specialising in self defense also has a book, The Law Of Self Defense which is definitely required reading.
Random people on the internet are probably not the best people to get information from. You're mostly getting opinions from people who's knowledge base is unknown.
Having said that here's my info on it, lol. I was in Law Enforcement in one of America's biggest cities for 22 years, have been reading about the topic since I was 14, including those books and took LFI1 with Mas, which covers the use of deadly force.
Could it be used against you? Of course. The type of modifications and sometimes even gun or it's name COULD be a problem.
But they're easy enough mod's to stay away from, like super light trigger's, after market trigger's stupid things like having "Smile, wait for flash" on the muzzle, .On triggers I would say a good rule of thumb is don't go lighter than the manufacturers MININMUM trigger pull weight, if they have one. Manufacturer's weight/trigger not working for ya? Use something else. There are a TON of aftermarket trigger's for the Glock. And a ton of people using them. They REALLY can't shoot the stock 5-6 pound trigger accurately?!?
I'd also say depending on where you are something like an AR is going to draw heat. Short of total civil breakdown or multiple heavily armed home invaders I'd avoid them. A Mini 14 with a wood stock, or light colored, Hogue used to make a tan one for it, is gonna go over a LOT better with the average non gun juror even if the prosecutor makes it an issue.
I'm NOT saying I agree with this and believe the weapon you use is irrelevant, and frankly think this type of thing is utterly ridiculous as long as you're using a weapon that's safely functioning and as long as your use of it is justified, but to deny could happen is to deny reality, ask Kyle Rittenhouse.
I'm also not saying use a revolver only or don't have high cap mags, just be ready if they become an issue. As Mas says be ready for the attack (in court) and have a defense/reason/explanation ready if it comes up. Just thinking it shouldn't matter doesn't matter and isn't up to us. It's up to various prosecutors around a big country.

The same way the possibility of being the victim of a violent crime is real and we acknowledge and work around it to defend ourselves, so is the possibility your choice of gun it's name or mag capacity COULD be an issue. Don't deny it just because it's inconvenient or you don't like it like the people who refuse to take responsibility for defending themselves.

[Bolster]

The person who spoke, and speaks most about this is Massad Ayoob...

Many thanks for the info and the leads! Much appreciated!

[Co Pilot]

The person who spoke, and speaks most about this is Massad Ayoob...

Many thanks for the info and the leads! Much appreciated!

No worries. Mas' book is called Deadly Force. I highly recommend it. Let me know if there's anything else I might be able to give you info on. But remember, it's just some dude o the internet!

[shunsui]

You can find a lot of Massad Ayoob's videos if you do a search on youtube.

[TomAiello]

The best legal strategy I've heard is to call the local PD and ask what their patrol officers carry, and then carry that. If you are carrying the same gun the police in your jurisdiction have decided is best for protecting the public, you have a pretty strong case that it's best for protecting you (a member of the public).

I'd worry a lot more about this if I was living in a place like California, though. Where I live it's a non-issue.

[Co Pilot]

The best legal strategy I've heard is to call the local PD and ask what their patrol officers carry, and then carry that. If you are carrying the same gun the police in your jurisdiction have decided is best for protecting the public, you have a pretty strong case that it's best for protecting you (a member of the public).

I'd worry a lot more about this if I was living in a place like California, though. Where I live it's a non-issue.

I wouldn't say you have to make sure it's issued by your local Department. As long as it's a safely functioning firearm you should be fine. I would definitely expect the possibility of a problem if you chose a 44 Mag or something. There is a well documented case of a gentleman who shot a guy on a walking trail with a 10MM and the prosecution made a HUGE deal of it. And jurors interviewed after were apparently VERY swayed by the argument there was no "need" for such a "powerful" weapon! From what I understand his lawyer did little to counter or even address that issue.
This was in Arizona by the way. A fair number of years back before their politics had changed so much from all the Californians who moved there. So it can be an issue anywhere.
So it may have been something that could have been negated had the lawyer had a cogent defense, as Massad Ayoob recommends, of why his client was carrying a 10MM. the fact it was a trail in Arizona where there could have been wild animals of the sort requiring that caliber comes to mind.
IF it's REALLY a concern the closest I would come is to make sure it's a FAIRLY widely used/issued gun by Law Enforcement or the Military. Or had been.