I would be against it; Use what LE uses, otherwise you could be having to explain your choice to a jury, and they probably won't believe you.
Mosad Ayoob wrote an article I read not too long ago in "The Complete Book of Handguns 2012" about his being part of a defense team for a police officer who shot a suspect, and the prosecutor was pressing charges because the city was going to riot over the ordeal. Instead of pursuing the case as an inquiry into justifiable shooting or not justifiable shooting, he pursued the case as a negligent "Accidental Discharge" in the heat of the moment. The prosecution pushed a theory that the officer cocked his handgun into SA mode and then "bumped" the trigger, discharging the firearm because his firearm had a "hair trigger" and was thus "reckless". He referenced 3 court cases related to "hair triggers" and one of them was specifically about a LE officer who installed the 3.5lb disconnector in his Glock, and a court disallowing the dismissal of the unintentional shooting case because the officer had swapped in that 3.5lb disconnector, reducing the trigger pull force to below spec.
Anyway, I wouldn't want to give the prosecution any opening to pursue, including the subjective "hair trigger" argument, to justify my imprisonment, should I ever have to use my firearm. If you stick with what LE uses, they can't call it evil, or unreliable, or having a "hair trigger" to put you away on a technicality or subjective value judgement that you can be sure that the jury would not be qualified to consider.
Good luck.
Mosad Ayoob wrote an article I read not too long ago in "The Complete Book of Handguns 2012" about his being part of a defense team for a police officer who shot a suspect, and the prosecutor was pressing charges because the city was going to riot over the ordeal. Instead of pursuing the case as an inquiry into justifiable shooting or not justifiable shooting, he pursued the case as a negligent "Accidental Discharge" in the heat of the moment. The prosecution pushed a theory that the officer cocked his handgun into SA mode and then "bumped" the trigger, discharging the firearm because his firearm had a "hair trigger" and was thus "reckless". He referenced 3 court cases related to "hair triggers" and one of them was specifically about a LE officer who installed the 3.5lb disconnector in his Glock, and a court disallowing the dismissal of the unintentional shooting case because the officer had swapped in that 3.5lb disconnector, reducing the trigger pull force to below spec.
Anyway, I wouldn't want to give the prosecution any opening to pursue, including the subjective "hair trigger" argument, to justify my imprisonment, should I ever have to use my firearm. If you stick with what LE uses, they can't call it evil, or unreliable, or having a "hair trigger" to put you away on a technicality or subjective value judgement that you can be sure that the jury would not be qualified to consider.
Good luck.