gspn said:
In a self defense case where deadly force is legally applied...how would it matter if your trigger weight was 10 lbs or 2 lbs? Trigger weight doesn't determine if your life was in danger...the attackers actions determine it....
Well for one thing, it's not a self defense case unless the DA and/or grand jury and/or (if you're unlucky) the jury at your trial decide that it is. Until then, it's an aggravated assault or manslaughter case, depending on the condition of the person you shot.
The DA, in evaluating whether to prosecute someone's intentional act of violence against another human when the actor has claimed self defense, will be considering all factors taken together. So --
- Will the actor's using a lethal weapon with and especially sensitive trigger influence the DA's decision about whether he will be able to convince a jury that the actor's act of violence was not legally justified? Maybe and maybe not. The thing is that we have no way to know ahead of time.
- If if goes to the grand jury, will the actor's using a lethal weapon with and especially sensitive trigger influence the grand jury's decision about whether to indict? Maybe and maybe not. The thing is that we have no way to know ahead of time.
- If the actor is charged/indicted and the question goes to trial, will the DA be able to introduce evidence regarding he defendant's using a lethal weapon with and especially sensitive trigger and argue that the jury should infer from that the the defendant is disposed to recklessness and violence? Maybe and maybe not. The thing is that we have no way to know ahead of time.
- If the evidence gets to the jury, will they care? Maybe and maybe not. The thing is that we have no way to know ahead of time.
That's a lot of unknowables. But one takes the issue off the table if he doesn't use a lethal weapon with an especially light trigger but uses a gun with what could be described as a standard service trigger.
You "pays your money and takes your chance." Personally I think it's a good idea to avoid, to the extent reasonably possible, things you can't control.
Were I a prosecutor I'd frame the issue as whether or how using a gun with a "hair" trigger reflects on the character or disposition of the defendant. And in a case in which the defendant attempts to avoid criminal liability for an intentional act of violence against another human on the grounds that he reasonably determined that such act of violence was necessary and justified, the character and disposition of the defendant can be a legitimate issue.
Several years ago a lawyer by the name of Lisa Steele wrote an excellent article for lawyers on defending a self defense case. The article was entitled "Defending a Self Defense Case" and published in the March, 2007, edition of the journal of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers,
The Champion. It was republished in four parts, with permission, on the website, Truth About Guns. The article as republished can be read here:
Part 1;
Part 2;
Part 3; and
Part 4.
As Ms. Steele explains the unique character of a self defense case in Part 1 (emphasis added):
...Self-defense is all-or-nothing. In order to establish it, the client has to admit being at the crime scene, with a weapon, which he or she used to intentionally harm the aggressor. The client has to admit that he injured the aggressor. The client has to convince the jury that if a reasonable person had been standing in his shoes, the reasonable person would have done the same thing. In effect, the aggressor invited his fate by threatening or inflicting serious bodily harm, or by threatening to kill the client.
In one fell swoop, the client has given up alibi and mistaken identity defenses. He or she has given up any claim that the wound was made by accident. Generally, the client must give up provocation (heat of passion or extreme emotional disturbance). Logically, provocation implies an unreasonable response to a situation, and mitigates murder to manslaughter. Self-defense implies a rational response to a very dangerous situation and, if successful, results in an acquittal. Similarly, the client must give up claims of mental illness or insanity and defenses based on intoxication or drug use....
If the character and/or disposition of the defendant (e. g., reckless, predisposed to violence, etc.) could cast doubt upon the reasonableness of his conclusion that lethal force was necessary, the issue would be material to the jury's evaluation of the claim of self defense.
It's quite possible, with practice and training, to be able to effectively manage a gun with a decent service trigger for self defense. A great many such guns have been successfully carried and used by law enforcement, the military and, no doubt, private citizens.
gspn said:
...I am the finely tuned killing machine...
A statement well calculated to delight a prosecutor and turn any jury against you.
