I love my S&W revolvers and have enough buddies that own or have owned Taurus for me to know I’ll never touch one.
Not really a fan of this guy but good read about lock failing on his 44 Mag
http://michaelbane.blogspot.com/2007/08/s-revolver-safety-failure.html
I was thinking of removing the locks on my Smiths then read this. I don’t carry my Smiths but if removed the lock still a chance they could be used against you.
http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=466935
[i]"A search of caselaw databases under topics such as “magazine disconnector” are unlikely to turn up anything. Caselaw is made of appealed issues. Shootings with modified guns are rare. Moreover, courts tend to leave this sort of argument within the realm of attorney and trial judge discretion.
If the charge is manslaughter or reckless endangerment, or the lawsuit revolves around negligence, the accusing side is absolutely allowed to establish “continuing patterns of negligent or reckless behavior,” and removing safety devices from lethal weapons lands square in that ballpark.
One may argue, as one poster did, that one removed the device because he thought it constituted faulty design. But this leaves whomever makes that argument open to the rejoinder, “Mr. Defendant, if you’re such a gun expert that you know more about gun design than the engineers who designed the pistol in question, and know more about it than the gun factory that made it – WHY DID YOU BUY A GUN YOU THOUGHT HAD A DEFECTIVE DESIGN IN THE FIRST PLACE?” That’s gonna be a tough one to answer.
As noted, because most folks don’t remove safety devices from handguns, this rarely comes up. The one case I’ve seen was one I was consulted on a number of years ago by Mark Seiden, the prominent Miami defense attorney. His client was charged with manslaughter relating to the accidental discharge of a factory stock Colt Commander. The discharge took place in an office, making the entire office area a crime scene, including the parking lot. The client’s car was searched, and police recovered a Browning Hi-Power the defendant kept loaded in the vehicle. He had bought it used, the magazine disconnector safety already removed, and had left it in that condition. The assigned prosecutor made a huge deal over this, claiming that it showed a propensity to do reckless and negligent things with loaded weapons, even though that gun was in no way involved in the death in question.
Notice that even though the gun was in that condition when he bought it second hand, the State was prepared to argue that this was no excuse: the man was still using, for defensive purposes presumably, a lethal weapon with a safety device removed.
Mark got the guy a good plea deal, and has asked me to spare his client further humiliation by not mentioning his name. Out of respect to Mark, I’ve agreed to that stipulation. However, anyone can contact Attorney Mark Seiden in Miami, FL and confirm the nature of the case.
There are also, of course, several liability lawsuits against manufacturers arising out of accidental shootings which allege negligence in not producing the guns with a magazine disconnector. While I personally consider that another matter, it shows that “the absence of this device as an indicator of negligence” is a concept that’s definitely on the collective radar screen of plaintiff’s bar.
Cordially,
Mas "[/i]
Not willing to to take the chance myself.
