[Caseless]

Manual safety in this case excludes "automatic" grip safeties like those found on HK P7 and Springfield Armory XD.
I just like to know about other shooters' preferences.
Thanks for voting.

[Handy]

No.

A defense gun needs to be safe, but it also needs to be fireable under great duress. A safety is a possible hinderance to defending your life, and a more serious one than a 12 lbs. trigger.

A manual safety is not 'KISS'.

[Penforhire]

How about "not a factor" as an answer? You should train with your SD weapon(s) until their manual or arms is automatic. If that means flipping a safety then fine, okay.

A safety is just one of several systems on a weapon that all have to function properly to launch a projectile. Ever look inside the trigger safety systems of Glocks and the like (Walther P99 too)? That's an ugly mechanical mess but it serves a purpose.

Advocates of safeties may cite the advantage in case the weapon is taken from you in a struggle (most BG's will NOT automatically flip off your safety before trying to zap you). Or how the fixed safety is a requirement to safely carry 1911-style SA triggers cocked and locked.

My current SD gun of choice (P99) has no separate safety. My last one (series 70 1911) did. Answer to your question: not a factor.

[MikeJ]

I agree with Handy, I don't want to have to think about anything other than pulling the trigger if I am attacked. I would also add that I am not fond of DA/SA guns for defensive purposes; I don't want the additional operation of lowering a hammer following a gun fight. I have never been involved in a gun fight but I am certain that in the event I ever was I would be quite shaken up afterwards and the less I have to remember to make the gun safe the better. I realize that this doesn't hold true for everyone, I can only assume my own reactions, therefore all of my defensive guns are either DA revolvers or DAO pistols. I leave my DA/SA and SA pistols for recreational shooting. Mike

[sm]

This is going to get good.

[jwrussell]

I am as well going with no about the manual safety. Like the previous post's have said, I dont want to have to remeber to take the safety off when so many other things are going through my head in a situation where my weapon is pointed at someone. My Ruger has a simple decocker that I absolutely love. This is my duty weapon and by pressing it, it returns the hammer from single action to double action. All I have to do is pull...........

[Smoke]

Allright, just to keep it interesting.....

I'm going with a "Yes" because I only shoot 1911 style guns.

Its the platform I've chose for defense and any other occasion to need a handgun.

I train with it exclusively. Thumbing the safety off is as natural as raising the sights to my eye. Its to the point of being reflexive.

Losing your gun in a struggle is an issue and perhaps a manual safety might be an asset here, but not by much. If I have my gun out and pointed at someone you can bet the safety is already off! If I lose my gun at this point in a struggle well.,....

I like a manual safety more for the reason of a kid accidentally getting a hold of one of my guns. Shouldn't ever happen, hasn't ever happened to me, but anyone can be careless at some point. And any 3 year old knows how to pull a trigger.

If you train with one platform everything becomes natural. If you switch out platforms regularly when the chips are down you might have to stop and think "What gun am I holding?" even if only for a split second.

I think knowing your weapon is more important than whether it has a safety or not.

[tobeat1]

Dont like safeties on a "social" gun. That said I think if I trained exclusively with, say, a 1911 pattern pistol to the exclusion of everything else I would probably be comfortable carrying one.

When in question, leave no doubt.

[P95Carry]

I'll vote No .... even tho I do feel well comfortable with an HP safety ... it is well positioned and with familiarity no sweat to ease of as gun comes up. I just happen not to use it as a first choice daily carry - just sometimes when i want something slimmer

However .. personally I favor my Rugers .... I am in the D/A - S/A camp .... and happen also to like the decocker. So much on this subject is down to what you like and what works .. for you. I love 1911's but it is too late in my life to want to switch to one for carry ...... even tho so many do. My P97, that now has pretty much taken over from P95 (ergonomically, identical), is ideal - for me .... and despite the relative effort of first shot D/A ... allows me a very useful, accurate, fast and reliable platform.

[Handy]

I should have said in my first post that my manual safety issue is not about failing to remember. I think that can be addressed with training (though it still happens, anyway).

Mainly, I think a manual thumb safety increases the amount of dexterity necessary to fire, and you may not have it. A bad grip from the draw, a wound to the hand, the safety blocked by the BG, the off hand and a single sided safety, etc. Add to that the chance of a rushed attempt to off-safe and fire binding the trigger and safety, losing time.

I firmly believe that a realistic CCW shooting will likely take place at knife range. The gun must fire, regardless of grip. You can cut off a thumb and 3 fingers and still reliably fire a DA gun, either hand.

[cordex]

Depends on the gun. Depends on the shooter.

1911 - SA, lightish and short trigger pull ... Manual safety sounds great to me.
Revolver - DA, heavyish and long trigger pull ... Manual safety unnecessary.

Casual shooter, or shooter with small hands using a pistol with difficult to access manual safety? Manual safety might be a bad idea.

Well-trained individual with lots of practice with his/her platform? Their call.

[BevrFevr]

to flip a safety off then you have no business pulling a trigger cause god only knows where the bullet is gonna go. Barney Fife comes to mind.

Depending on the gun I don't think you are safer with or without a safety. Guys without safeties shoot themselves and others daily. Guys with safeties shoot themselves and others daily.

-bevr

[Handy]

Bevr,

You're misquoting me. Obviously, you don't go to the range with a broken hand. But you don't have that kind of option during the fight.

[45auto]

I'll vote yes, but I also shoot a 1911 so that may not be an objective vote.

Clearly, any gun is safer with a manual safety. Bad things can happen during a "brain fade". They shouldn't happen, but it's human nature.

The big question, and I don't know the answer, is whether you "remove" the safety when you need it.

Police departments obviously feel they are not required, while the military insists on them. They have them on their rifles, why wouldn't they have them on their handguns?

I shoot with my thumb on the safety which eliminates the 'forgetting' part... on a 1911 anyway. But if my thumb was no longer functional, that would be a problem.

That doesn't mean I am against carrying a gun without a safety, it's just not as safe. The chances of me shooting a handgun in self defense might rival the odds of winning a lottery.

[Handy]

This isn't true: Police departments obviously feel they are not required, while the military insists on them.
M11?

But this is definetly true:D The chances of me shooting a handgun in self defense might rival the odds of winning a lottery.

[P95Carry]

Clearly, any gun is safer with a manual safety. 45 auto ..... not so sure of the ''clearly'':) having a manual safety is one thing .. correct use thereof is another! if we assume total competence with such then it's pretty damn good I'll agree.

I do tho defend my carry choice .. however ugly and chunky it is ... P95DC or P97DC . IMO these are inherently very safe indeed ..... and, I'd not expect anyway less safe than those guns with a manual. Even with round chambered (as usual) there is little chance of much happening ''accidentally'' with the D/A trigger poundage!!

Not trying to be pedantic ... just ''defending my corner''!:p :)

[Andrew Wyatt]

as for the KISS principle, take a look at the innards of a CZ or a sig sometime and compare them to a 1911.

[Handy]

Andrew,

The KISS principle can be applied to many things, in this case we were talking ergonomics.

If you want to look at KISS from a mechanical point of view, learn to love the Glock, or better yet, the VP70. If you want to compare the 1911 and CZ, I suggest you start by comparing the 1911 barrel/link/bushing/slide with the CZ barrel/slide. Which one is simpler?

[Graystar]

Clearly, any gun is safer with a manual safety. What does "safer" mean? A gun is dangerous and needs to be treated with respect at all times. I think manual safeties just give a false sense of security that leads to trouble.

[GoldenLoki]

Non issue.

Just know how to use the gun you use.

GL

[Sean Smith]

Playing a bit of devil's advocate...

1. Shooting in self defense is, first and foremost, about hitting. You might call this Rule Zero; without the hit, the gun is nothing. Accordingly, one could argue from first principles that anything that detracts from the hit is contrary to the spirit of the thing in and of itself.

2. Most shooters will admit to shooting a gun with a short, relatively light trigger better than one with a long, relatively heavy trigger. Heck, if you watch most people with DA/SA guns, they don't even practice with them in double-action mode, especially when they want to show off how good they are.

3. Saying that trigger weight doesn't matter because of stress/short engagement distances/whatever is a flawed point of view. Stress magnifies shooter limitations, and under those circumstances you do not want a trigger system that complicates hitting the target with a heavy pull and inconsistent shot-over-shot trigger weights. Furthermore, assuming short engagement distances is to prepare for only the best-case scenario, which is misguided. Why would you want to handicap yourself in the event an other-than-short-range problem presents itself?

4. Consider the time factor. Deactivating the manual safety on a SA gun does not take extra time, because the action is done concurrent with the draw. With both guns on target in the same time, an accurate shot with a 12 pound trigger will take appreciably longer than an accurate shot with a 6 pound trigger... pulling a long 12 pound trigger cannot be done as quickly as a short 6 pound trigger without hopelessly duffing the shot. Trick revolver shooters with supertuned custom Smith & Wessons notwithstanding.

5. Everyone with a stake in fast, accurate shooting in competition uses a single-action trigger system when the rules allow it. Chalking this up to "tradition" requires that you not actually look at the guns involved, with their polymer frames and titanium parts and trick optics boosted from a MiG-27. Is there a reason why you wouldn't want to use a system noted for fast, accurate shooting in real life, too? (If not to the extreme of 2.5 pound triggers and holographic sights...)

(The real answer to all of this, by the way, would sound alot like: pick a system that works for you, and then master it.)

[justice4all]

I prefer the point and shoot method of self defense. I own a Ruger with a satey/decocker, but I usually carry it with the safety off. I also like to teach people how to shoot, so having the safety is nice during those sessions. The bottom line is train with and know whatever kind of system you carry.

[45auto]

Sometimes I "broad stroke" things, one of my faults.
Handy:
My comments on Police departments were only based on the sales of pistols such as Glock, which appears to dominate, Sig and various brands that have DAO, with no manual safety. Certainly, there are departments that puchase autoloaders with manual safeties, maybe for that reason, maybe not! But the single largest seller appeas to be Glock. So, at the very least, having a manual safety is not the determining factor.

M11- I had to look that up...Sig! Had me on that one. But it appears the M9 is the primary handgun and a manual safety was mandated. Good timing for the American Rifleman to have an article on the military weapons!!!

Graystar: What I meant by "clearly safer" is that little extra margin of safety when a typically responsible user losses control of the handgun, or allows it to be places where it can be "handled" by those who shouldn't, i.e. children, non-gun people. It shouldn't happen, but "stuff" does.

P95Carry- Nothing wrong with chunky and ugly. I read good things about those pistols.

Not trying to defend or promote 1911s. What the manual safety gives, the short light trigger takes away- unless you really mean to do it.

[Handy]

45auto,

What I was pointing out is that there is no military mandate for a safety. The M9 was quite nearly a SIG 226. The military mandate was for a gun that decocks.

[Andrew Wyatt]

If you want to compare the 1911 and CZ, I suggest you start by comparing the 1911 barrel/link/bushing/slide with the CZ barrel/slide. Which one is simpler?


lets compare the whole gun.

how many moving parts are there in a 1911?

how many in a CZ?

how many in a sig?





The KISS principle can be applied to many things, in this case we were talking ergonomics.

I find the 1911 simpler from an ergonomics perspective since i don't have to shift my hand around to reach the trigger like i have to on the overly massive Cz-75s and glocks. ( i mean this, too. compared to a 1911, czs, berettas, and every other double stack i've handled is a horse pistol, except for the BHP, which fits my hand almost as well as a 1911.)

besides, i've never forgotten to disengage the safety on my 1911, and I INSTINCTIVELY TRY TO FLICK THE SAFETY OFF ON GUNS WITHOUT THE THUMB SAFETY.

I also have an ambidextrous thumb safety, and due to cirumstances, shoot pistols right handed and rifles left handed.
i shoot just about as well left handed as right and can operate all the controls with either hand.

[The Silver Bullet 1719]

Alright I'll stay out of the debate and I'll just answer the ? :) I personally don't like safeties, but I have my CZ C&L. I prefer C&L because if I go to the range to shoot, unless if I drop the hammer manually I'm getting NO DA practice. So thats why I just train myself to flick the safety while drawing my gun to align the sights. I like this on SA and DA/SA guns. But I don't have a problem with Glocks, Steyrs, and Walthers etc. I would feel fine about carrying one of those, since I believe the only reason it would go off if you were practicing bad firearm handleing.

[Graystar]

Consider the time factor. Deactivating the manual safety on a SA gun does not take extra time, because the action is done concurrent with the draw If the person remembers. As you said, stress magnifies shooter limitations, and also causes them to make mistakes they wouldn't normally make, such as forgetting to turn off the safety.

[Logistar]

I was GREAT at getting the safety off until I went out into a field, set up some targets and REALLY tried to draw and fire QUICKLY and under PRESSURE.

The good news! I was consistent at hitting the (defensive range) target about 3 out of 4 times.

The bad news. The reason I didn't hit the target 4 out of 4 times wasn't my aim... it was the fact that I did not ALWAYS get the safety off. About 1 in 4 times I didn't get a clean "swipe" and the safety was still on.

Even though I practiced it at home and at the range I can't do it reliably under (my own imposed) stress. I am not waiting to find out how I do under REAL stress. Safety off. (Or no safety)

Logistar

[rebbryan]

Yep.

I like a manual safety more for the reason of a kid accidentally getting a hold of one of my guns. Shouldn't ever happen, hasn't ever happened to me, but anyone can be careless at some point. And any 3 year old knows how to pull a trigger.

happened here when a county officer went home after a gun safety class, put his belt on the table, and while talkin to his wife his 3 year old pulled out his sig and shot him and killed him.

[benEzra]

I say yes. Not for carry, primarily, but for added safety when loading/unloading, administrative handling, holstering, etc.

I carry a 3913LS (DA/SA) with a round in the chamber and safety off when holstered, so forgetting to flick it off in a self-defense situation is moot. However, having the safety allows you to stick it in your waistband in a pinch. If you are a LEO, it can also be helpful to be able to put your holstered weapon on safe if you are going into a situation where a disarm attempt is more likely than an initial armed confrontation.
Most shooters will admit to shooting a gun with a short, relatively light trigger better than one with a long, relatively heavy trigger. Heck, if you watch most people with DA/SA guns, they don't even practice with them in double-action mode, especially when they want to show off how good they are.
Only when shooting at 100-yd targets.:) At practical self-defense ranges, I haven't seen any difference at all between DA and SA, but I have to say my 3913LS does have a very smooth DA trigger.

[BevrFevr]

Partner, I wasn't quoting you at all. I did use one of the same words you used though. You do get credit for getting me to thinking about it though. I think my points still hold water, even with a "broken hand".

I wonder what they did in the days of yor when they had to cock the weapons first(yikes)? Must have required a hell of a lot more dexterity than the members of this forum seem to possess.

On a side note there sure seem to be alot of quick draw artists here. It's fine if that's what people want to do. Barney Fife loved it. I wonder what would have happend if he had a glock?

The fact is though that being involved in a self defense shooting is remote. Being in a self defence shooting where a quick draw was THE deciding factor is EXCEEDINGLY rare(even for police). I wish more people would practice safe driving, that would really make a difference in all of our daily lives.

By all means though knock yourselves out! Any practice is better than no practice.

-bevr

[M1911]

These days, I mostly carry a 1911. But I've carried Glocks, Kahrs and a S&W revolver as well. Safety or no doesn't really matter to me -- either will work. It's just a matter of training.

[Handy]

Andrew Wyatt,

This is off topic, but I'll answer your question.

A 1911A1 has 53 parts. A Sig 220 has 49. The CZ is similar to the Sig. The 1911 seems simpler because it is easier to disassemble (different pins), but is in many way more complicated AND fragile, like in the construction of the disconnector. If you think that unfair, consider how many pistols you've heard of going full auto that WEREN'T 1911s?

If you really want the fewest MOVING parts, I recommend striker fired blowback pistols.

Nothing wrong with the 1911, but I don't see how it particularly makes for a KISS example, with a bunch of parts and two external safeties to deactivate for firing.

[1911Tuner]

One of Browning's earlier prototypes that he submitted for
evaluation didn't have one. He felt that the trigger blocking
action of the grip safety was sufficient, but the Army saw it
differently...so the thumb safety was born.

The real safety is you, and relying on a mechanical device
to keep you out of trouble isn't wise. The safety doesn't
bother me. I've reached for it so many countless times,
that I find myself going through the motion if I pick up a
turnip.

In the event that I find my right hand disabled or compromised,
I would feel about as comfortable leaving it off and carrying
cocked and un-locked as an expedient means of getting home,
and completely at ease if the pistol is a Series 80 Colt.
The main thing is to keep your finger off the trigger until you
are morally and legally prepared for the gun to fire.

Just my nickel's worth,
Tuner

[Handy]

Tuner,

In the event that I find my right hand disabled or compromised...
What do you do if the hand gets hurt BEFORE you are able to deactivate the safety?

[Logistar]

My sister (who is about to start carrying as soon as she gets her CCW) says that she wants to keep a safety ON at all times with her carry gun.

Her reasoning is that "If someone takes the gun away from me then they can't shoot me." - presumably because they can't find the safety.

I advocate carrying with the safety off (or not having a manual safety). Any comments??? (Hope this isn't OT)

Logistar

[BevrFevr]

How hurt is it? baddda Boom!

If your hand is sooo hurt that you can't flip off a safety will you even be able to hold a pistol? Are are you talkin about a hand that is just hurt enough so that you can't turn off the safety but not too hurt to fire the gun?

That's a pretty neat little window to be operating in.

I don't think your premise of having a hurt hand is enough to justify having a safety or not having a safety. What if you just happen to lose all but your thumb and pinky. Should we have voice activated triggers as back up? Or maybe all of your fingers are gone but one and you just lost an eye and your lumbago is acting up as well as a wicked rash and and ingrown toenail.

All meant in humor buddy!

-bevr

[Boats]

Speaking as someone who finds his right a poor substitute for his left hand, I gotta laugh at the direction this thread has taken.

Some pistols with manual safeties have them on both sides, (1911 ambi, Beretta duty caliber pistols, CZ-85, Rugers, Smiths, some BHPs, on and on)--issue of the injured strong hand is moot if one practices off hand as I do.

Some pistols with manual safeties only feature them on the left side, (1911 stock, CZ-75, classic BHP, most mouseguns.) As I learned on the stock 1911s in the Navy, a southpaw grips the pistol with the four fingers, swings his thumb over the hammer and disengages the safety. The safety can also be "rubbed off" on something handy (no pun intended).

"What if the right hand is injured before needing to draw?" I have to ask how many people practice drawing from their strong-side concealment holster with their off hands? That must be a comically contorted drill, manual safety present or not.

[Handy]

Bevr,

That is all true. The safety issue (at least for me) comes down to which is more important:

An accurate first shot (C&L)
OR
A reliable first shot (safetyless DA)


This is all angels dancing on the head of a pin. But if we're going to debate it, we have to get into the weeds.

Really, the best reason to use a manual safety is because that is what you're used to on the gun you are most comfortable with. But a newer shooter has the luxury to pick whatever gun, and a thread like this airs all the reasons for A or B.

A little debate doesn't hurt, and occasionally changes minds.


Boats,

If you aren't too fat, drawing across the back from a 4:00 holster position isn't hard. Same with cavalry draw on a crossdraw. But several holster types/positions do make it hard, and SHOULD be a consideration.

[Dorrin79]

I prefer guns without for carry purposes.

For a range gun, I don't think it matters at all.

One of the things I really like about my P-11 is the complete absence of external controls to snag on clothing, or forget to manipulate in the heat of the moment.

[Ala Dan]

Greeting's All-

Sense SIG-Sauer's "Classic" P-series has three passive
saftey's; I tend to favor the decocking system!:uhoh: :D

Never had a problem with it~

Best Wishes,
Ala Dan, N.R.A. Life Member

[dan_s]

A manual safety in a modern firearm is little more than a security blanket for those who can't remember to leave their finger outside of the trigget guard ?

[Correia]

Man this thread is funny! :D

Ok, if you have trouble remembering to take off your safety under stress then that isn't the gun for you. If you choose a gun with a safety you should train with it until you are perfectly comfortable with manipulating it under all conditions.

I always laugh at the idea that some folks have that we are going to be too stupid to deactivate a thumb safety under pressure. I have managed to deactivate the tiny little button on my 870 thousands of times fast enough to hit a flushed bird. I can draw my 1911 and deactivate the safety every single time it comes out of my holster in a match, on the clock, under pressure, with lots of people looking at me. :p

If you are not practiced enough to manipulate your safety under stress, then I'm pretty damn sure that you aren't practiced enough to make good hits on a target under stress either.

[Handy]

Congratulations Moderator Correia, you have just called Logistar stupid.

HimEven though I practiced it at home and at the range I can't do it reliably under (my own imposed) stress.

YouI always laugh at the idea that some folks have that we are going to be too stupid to deactivate a thumb safety under pressure.

[Correia]

No Handy, I didn't call anybody anything. Read my first paragraph. I happen to like Logistar.

Trying to bait me? And my first name isn't Moderator. It is Larry. :)

So did John Browning beat up your Grandpa or something? You seem to have a bit of a grudge.

[sm]

I said at the beginning...this thread will get good, quick.

Oh ,I use and prefer the 1911 btw. For those that don't know ,I shot my first in 1961...I was 6 y/o.

I find myself snicking off the "nonexistent" safety on a Revolver. I have one and only DAO, I 'snick the safety off it too...something must be ingrained somewhere.

I do not use ambi's, I learned to manipulate the 1911 weak-handed without ambis, same with mag release mine are stock too.

I do the same thing with shotguns, I prefer a certain MOA and I assure I can snick and get on bird or target in plenty of time.

I know where my trigger finger belongs...you see , though I didn't own one set up as such, I can SAFELY shoot a shotgun without a safety ( removed for competition) .

Practice and training , bottom line.
Heck, I bet many here on the board can drive a manual trannie, drink coffee and /or smoke at the same time...betcha.

The Key:
Gun fit to shooter in a platform with reliable ammo , in said gun, allowing shooter quick accurate shots, in an effective caiber. Once this is determined , practice, dry-fire - training.

Ala Dan with DA/SA 220, Irwin with a model 19, pax with a glock 26...don't matter to me, I ain't shooting the gun --they are--and thats what's matters...IMO

You will never see me critique what another shoots...and d**n well to boot.

[Handy]

Hey Larry,

No, just thought it was funny. (Bait is for fishing.) There's two groups:

Those who don't trust the safety because it HAS been missed or stuck, etc.
Those who think it's ridiculous to claim that you might not get the safety off.
I think the experience of failing is more compelling than the experience of not yet failing, but that's another unpopular opinion.

As far as my "JMB Grudge" goes, that's a popular accusation. Welcome to the bandwagon.

[1911Tuner]

A quote:

If you think that unfair, consider how many pistols you've heard of going full auto that WEREN'T 1911s?

Never saw one do it that wasn't worn slap out or that
some aspiring kitchen table smith hadn't been dinking around
with sear angles and hammer hooks, light mainsprings and
the like. I spend about half my bench time addressing
hammer follow issues on "Match trigger" jobs...some from
skilled smiths.

The thing was never meant to have a trigger like that.
rather than risk a flame war, I'll wait until I'm asked.
It's not a surgeon's scalpel...it's a broadhead ax. An understanding of the pistol can clear up some misconceptions.

Go ahead...ask. I love questions.
Tuner

To answer your original question...Several that were factory
stock...and about half of them do it when the decocker is
used. Exciting stuff, but it does tend to frighten the spectators.

[Handy]

Well, as Kuhnhausen points out, the trigger components of the 1911 contain two "weak" points; the disconnector and the sear or sear spring. Failing to disconnect and sear bounce are seperate problems, but I've seen or experienced both on multiple occasions. No big deal, the 1911 sear and disconnector are two reasons the trigger can be made so nice.

I brought that up just to challenge the assertion that other guns, like the Sig that puts the disconnector on the trigger bar, have overly complicated internals. They really don't, and would be in extremis to end up with "sear bounce" or a disconnector failure. There are other ways to go full auto, but most guns do not do it from the fire control as much as stuck firing pins.

That's all, just a little compare and contrast.

[1911Tuner]

Jerry has a good bit of knowledge of the 1911, and is a respected
authority, but there are a few places that he falls flat. Keep
in mind that he plays with sear angles and hammer hooks, too.
He's trying to outsmart John Moses, just like the others...
trying to make the gun into something that it isn't.

The sear and disconnect are potential trouble spots...when they
are modified, and especially when spring rates are taken very
far from the original format. John Browning knew more about
the issue than any expert alive or dead, and careful thought was given to all the weak areas involved. He was known for his
tendency to over-engineer certain areas of the gun.

Hammer and sear bounce was addressed by making the hooks longer than necessary for static engagement. JMB
knew that they bounced. The 23 pound mainspring that
so many trigger men tell you to toss for a 17# spring because the
23 pound spring is far heavier than it needs to be for ignition, but it resists inertia and keeps the hooks and sear engaged to a higher degree. That heavy spring was put there for a very good reason, and the rating had little to do with making the gun go bang. It will do that with a 13 pound spring.

The left leg of the sear spring is routinely attacked for less
tension on the sear in order to take a few ounces off resistance
to pulling the trigger...but that is negating part of the resistance
to the same bounce that makes hammers follow and 1911's go
full-auto. Ask me how I know.

Polishing the top of the disconnect can bring on troubles too...as
can a too-short disconnect that works fine until it wears a little.
A slightly shorter than spec disconnect can enhance trigger pull, but at what cost?

Finally, the practice of cutting the hammer hooks perfectly square enhances trigger pull, but the positive rake on the hooks tends to pull the sear back to the bottom of the hooks when the
main and sear spring get tired and the hammer tries to get out
of engagement.

Engineering rule one:
Anytime something is changed, three other things must be
changed to compensate.

Not picking a fight, just stating some truths.

Take care, and shoot straight!
T

[Logistar]

I always laugh at the idea that some folks have that we are going to be too stupid to deactivate a thumb safety under pressure.
HEY! I resemble that remark! ;)

In reality, I believe I would have pulled my gun, swiped the safety, and fired if the situation called for it. I practiced it and practiced it and I honestly believe that it would be unlikely that I would miss the safety in a defensive situation.

When I was "experimenting" (learning, fact gathering, whatever you want to call it), I tried pulling the gun and firing as rapidly as possible. I tried faster and faster. I THOUGHT I would start missing the target wildly but I won't (under ANY circumstances) pull the trigger until I am ON target. I was happy with my shots. (I kinda surprised myself.) The OTHER surprise was that to acheive that kinda speed I guess I was "cheating" when it came to getting the safety off. Occasionally, the trigger would not pull.

Since I was "pretending" to need a shot in a HURRY I got this REALLY sick feeling when I had the gun pointed DEAD on target and no bang. If I had needed the shot that quickly and the safety stayed on then I'd likely be dead before I could get it off and fire.

After that day if my gun has a safety it is off whenever holstered and ready for carry. All my carry guns are DA/DAO so the safety is not necessary anyway. Having said all that I believe EVERYONE should carry in a manner where they are comfortable carrying. - I just changed my mind. :)



It's OK. I knew what you meant anyway, Correia.

Logistar



Logistar: Gee, looks like I "accidentally" spilled a little superglue on Correia's CCW safety while it is in the on position.

Later that night....
Correia: OK all you gang members! Take THIS! (Silence) Hmmm.... my safety seems....... :what: :)
Gang Member: Looks like we got ourselves ANOTHER CCWer who is "too stupid to deactivate a thumb safety under pressure". Get him! :neener:

[Art Eatman]

Odd. Whether or not a self-loader did or didn't have a safety has never been anything I've ever thought about. Since I've been meddling with Ol' Slabsides for a really long time, thumbing the safety off is reflex.

I shot IPSC for three years, back in the early eighties before the days of race guns and zoomie holsters. The safety always came off during the draw from the holster. Reflex, no thought required.

I guess I just don't understand the problem.

:), Art

[45auto]

Good thread,

I'll ask the stupid questions.
When would the sear "bounce" off the hammer hooks? On recoil if the sear and hammer are not proper?
Would a series 80 prevent this or it happens when the trigger is depressed- of course?

Tuner: What do you feel is the lowest trigger pull(breaking like a glass rod) using the "original" type parts and springs?

Thanks

[1911Tuner]

Art! A kindred spriit! Ever shoot at North Wilkesboro NC?
It was there in 1978 that I learned during a tie-breaker that
Mickey Fowler is a tough man to beat on a plate machine.
Whew!

I miss the good old days...

Tuner

[Andrew Wyatt]

When you've shot a 1911 enough to make it look like this:

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?s=&postid=298691











Come back and tell me whether you think a manual safety is too difficult to use. People who train with their gun enough don't have these problems.

[1911Tuner]

Ahh...Good to see that another early production slabsides is still
sptitin' lead and shuckin' brass. I've got a Colt that was built
in 1912, and it still does range duty.

As far as lookin' like that...I've got a few that make your old girl
look positively radiant...So many cracks in the frame that it
looks like a dry river bed, and more than a few slides have
been shot to destruction.

If you take a notion to sell that old pistol, keep me in mind.
Looks like it's aquired some real character over the past
80 or so years.

Tuner

[sm]

Thanks for that pic, memories...sniff...wish I still had mine...

[Andrew Wyatt]

1911tuner: that's my dad's carry pistol and it's only been in existance since '78 or so. :)

it'll never be sold.

[Art Eatman]

Naw, Tuner, I only shot in matches in Austin and Houston. Another guy and I started the old Hill Country Practical Pistol Club and affiliated with IPSC "before it really got organized" as it is today. That was in March of 1981. I've always joked that Chip McCormick is "my fault", since I contributed to his getting interested in the organized competition.

Those were fun days. A bit of throat and polish, bevel the mag well, some trigger work and decent sights, and "Go for it!"

And I don't recall anybody ever blowing a run on account of having any trouble with the manual safety. :D

Art

[Delmar]

Thank you 1911Tuner for your expertice on the subject-I really get weary of all the 1911 bashers who heard a story or read a story about how this or that failed and the weapon misfired, went full auto and killed every one on the range and a whole host of fly food. I know there are people who just don't like ole slabsides, but thats all that needs to be said. There are those who cannot shoot them well and thats okay too. All kinds of makes and models and different kinds of actions out there-there is something for everyone.
I'm sure the hype out there is good for your business and the dremel company has prolly ruined more 1911's than mud and combat ever will. I don't see the 1911 as necessarily the do all and end all, but its what I have carried for over 30 years and it has done its job every single time. I can't ask for more reliability than that. Because I carry one, I get a lot of questions about it and hear all kinds of stories, but what makes me shake my head are those new shooters who buy one brand new and think they have to gut the thing and have to put in hundreds or thousands of dollars to get them "right." I tell them to go and spend their money on quality ammo and practice with it until they can really tell what they want to change. To the few who actually took my advise, it is amazing how stock their 1911 is.

[Correia]

Logistar, at that point I would be forced to use strong language, and buy a Glock or something. :)

[Logistar]

- and somehow I believe that might actually work, Correia.
:) I am usually too serious most of the time. - I am working on it though! :)

Seriously though, I hope everyone here understands and can tolerate the fact that some people aren't comfortable doing certain things. For several years I would not have considered carrying any weapon with the safety off. Over time I suppose you learn and gain confidence.

So many times I started to say that posters here (and on TFL) were nuts or unsafe... etc. Over time I have come to see that you guys are generally always right. I just had to learn. (I am still uncomfortable with C&L though- even though I know it is safe! :) )

I think the answer to the original question is: "Whatever you feel the most comfortable with". - After reading all these posts of course! ;)

Logistar

[emann]

NO!!!

[1911Tuner]

Ahhh...Sorry Andrew. I went back and took a second, closer look.
The lighting made it hard to see the scalloped area behind the trigger, and I didn't scroll down far enough to see the hammer.
Plus my eyes ain't what they used ta be...
My bad:o

Still looks like it's aquired some character though...

Keep it in the family.

Cheers!
T

[1911Tuner]

Those were the days Art...Reminds me of how old I'm gettin'...
Did Chip ever get that "heeling" problem cured?

Right on the head Delmar...about the Dremel and many other points.

As for business, I'm afraid that I haven't been a practicing
smith in about 12 years now, and most of my work is pro
bono....for the guy who does without lunch for 6 months to
be able to afford his pistol and winds up with a problem
child. The guy who has the same problem after it's been back
(to name your company warranty station) twice, and is too
honest to pass his problem on to another working stiff.
Mostly, it's a "Love of the Breed" kinda thing, and I get to
keep my hand in.



I spend a LOT of time getting hammers to stop following slides
on friends pistols after a trigger job goes south, though. Most
of the time, it's a 10-minute fix between stages at a match.
I get invited to the local matches...but not to compete. The
young upstarts are too tough for this old man. We've got a
19 year-old kid from Charlotte who is unreal. Look out Leatham,
Chris is comin' after ya...

Thanks for the positive responses. I know that sometimes I come off as opinionated and blunt, but it's not meant that way.

Cheers!
Tuner

[Mike Irwin]

Since I carry a revolver about 99% of the time, I'd have to say that in my case it's simply not applicable.

[P95Carry]

I know that sometimes I come off as opinionated and blunt Tuner ... I would disagree!! I am not one of the dedicated 1911 users but read about the breed always with interest. Despite my well advancing age, learning has not stopped.

I find your contributions most interesting ..... and am always keen to listen to the voice of experience. I consider you, amongst many .. a great asset to this board.:)

[1911Tuner]

P95, you're too kind. Many thanks amigo.

Maybe not blunt so much as one-track-minded...as in
"Just the facts ma'am."

It's folks like you who keep me doing this kind of thing...
despite the flames and the confrontations. Never stop
learning. I don't.

Cheers!
Tuner

[P95Carry]

P95, you're too kind. Many thanks amigo. I only tell em like I see em!! :)

[WingZero]

I shoot 1911's and glocks, so with (or without) a manual safety, doesn't really matter too me. What matters, is that it is a pistol I feel comfortable with. (Which is almost all of them).

[Pico]

I don't like an off switch for my handguns. Training may fool you into thinking you can deal with it but being human, there is always the chance you will leave the safety on when you need it the most.

I like internal safeties a la Glock and chose the CZ 75 BD for the decocker option as opposed to the cocked, locked, ready to rock option. I think decocking quickly to a heavy DA trigger pull is a much better safety option.

For any firearm, the best safety is a trigger finger off the trigger until needed.

Pico

[Mike Irwin]

"I always laugh at the idea that some folks have that we are going to be too stupid to deactivate a thumb safety under pressure."

Years ago Evan Marshall wrote an article in which he described being surprised by someone popping up where there shouldn't have been anyone.

He drew his gun, an S&W semi-auto, and promptly fumbled the safety several times before he got it off.

Turns out the guy wasn't a hostile, but just a mushroom who had been overlooked.

Marshall, IIRC, switched to a SIG after that encounter.

[Graystar]

Here's a thought I had about decockers....

What if, in the high stress of the situation, you decocked your gun before trying to shoot?

Think it can't happen? I wonder....hmmm :confused:

[Boats]

This thread is still going?



Years ago Evan Marshall wrote an article in which he described being surprised by someone popping up where there shouldn't have been anyone.

He drew his gun, an S&W semi-auto, and promptly fumbled the safety several times before he got it off.

Turns out the guy wasn't a hostile, but just a mushroom who had been overlooked.


Let's see--poor situational awareness, selects a gun with slide mounted safeties, fumbles with his gun and its hard to reach safeties. Fudges "statistics" on the side. Yeah, I'll take his word on something. Wouldn't trust the guy with a nail gun.

However, this "incident," provided it is not as obviously faked as many of the others he has "gathered," would have made a good data point for his "one shot stop" theory:rolleyes: had he just been able to snap fire into the "mushroom" with his panicky shooting style. :rolleyes:

[Handy]

Graystar,

If it is a decocker, and not a safety decocker, the gun would fire. So what would be the problem?

[1911Tuner]

How 'bout...Let's start by takin' the link out of the 1911 and go shoot it. You may be shocked to see that it works just fine.
The link is redundant. Commanders won't do this trick
due to different geometry on the lower barrel lug.

Then take the extractor out of a GI-spec gun, and shoot it with
true "GI Hardball" ammo or the faithful equivalent, and you may
be even more shocked to discover that the empty brass
will get out and the gun will return to battery without it.. You
may not even get a stovepipe stoppage for several magazines,
and then just on the last round. Want to make it work every time,
last round and all? Use a magazine with a round-topped follower.

Lose the slidestop during an emergency field-strip? Nadda
problemo...Just whittle a stick down to fit and stick it through the
hole. The gun should be good for about 200 rounds with that
"Expedient Emergency Field Repair".

Handy! Kudos, lad! I was wondering if anyone else had the
logic to see through the Marshall/Sanow "definitive" study.
So many take it as gospel, that I've stopped arguing the point.

Cheeeeeeers!
Tuner

[Mike Irwin]

Boats,

"Let's see--poor situational awareness, selects a gun with slide mounted safeties, fumbles with his gun and its hard to reach safeties."

Marshall's statistical difficulties aside, this particular incident plays VERY well in this discussion.

Let's take a look at all of your points, one by one, and you'll see what I mean...

"Poor situational awareness."

In that situation Marshall faced what most of us CCW people face every day. The possibility that someone we either see, or don't see, will become an immediate threat. It's a fantasy to believe that we all have TOTAL situational awareness at all times.

We don't have a TacTeam to sweep the area for us. We don't have a perimeter established. We don't do "dynamic entries" into every room we go into, or sweep the spaces between and under parked cars, behind dumpsters, and around trees and bushes before we pass.

selects a gun with slide mounted safeties

That's part of what this entire THREAD is about -- manual safetys, and by extension, their location.

As has been discussed in other recent threads, some people deal very well with slide mounted safeties. Some don't. Here's an ugly fact of life, though... ANY safety, including the generally thought idiot proof 1911 safety, can be fumbled in a high stress situation.

Lack of manually engaged safeties is one of the big reasons why I've chosen a revolver for my primary carry gun. As someone else stated, it's the original point & click interface.

[Flashpoint]

The option of the manual safety is why I bought the Steyr M40. They have the trigger safety to like the Glocks and others but also have the manual safety in the trigger guard if needed or desired. If a person doesn't want to use it then pop it up and forget about it. I would rather have it and not need than need it and wish I had it. Same thing goes for my P89 with a slide safty/decocker, I have never had a problem with the slide safety. I believe the Steyr to be safe without the manual safety on despite some the pass debates on the internal mechanisms.

[Handy]

1911Tuner,

I'm not sure what I'm getting Kudos for. Graystar asked about decockers, I answered with the consideration of a decocking lever (Sig), not the decocker/safety that Marshall had on his gun in the outlined incident.

Easy to pick on Marshall. He did a bad study, and he's foolish enough to discuss an error he made with the public. Boats (who certainly has never fumbled anything in his life) can feel pretty good about tearing down a noted police officer who had the audacity to both screw up, and be honest about it.


I guess one first needs to decide if you are a man like Boats (without error) or a man like Marshall, who makes small mistakes, even at critical times. I imagine Marshall learned from the experience and carried his Smith with the safety off from then on.

[Mike Irwin]

"I imagine Marshall learned from the experience and carried his Smith with the safety off from then on."

No, as I noted, I believe that he said he switched to a Sig.

I'm unearthing a LOT of my magazines from the time frame in which that story would have run.

I'll have to keep an eye out for it.

[Handy]

Mike,

Sorry, missed the Sig line. Same idea though - take the safety out of the equation.

[Andrew Wyatt]

how many people who only shoot one type of gun with a manually operated safety and do so often have problems with the safety?

[Boats]

Well allow me to shoot back. The safety is OFF.:evil:

Let's go over the anecdote again.

Years ago Evan Marshall wrote an article in which he described being surprised by someone popping up where there shouldn't have been anyone.

I admit to having limited information here, but it seems as if he was surprised by someone in a recently or supposedly "secured" area. If so, he also seemingly allowed his guard to drop in an area he seemed aware that he'd best draw down on the unsuspected subject. Bad form. One need not be a tactical Ninja to surmise this.

He drew his gun, an S&W semi-auto, and promptly fumbled the safety several times before he got it off.

Say what you will, this sounds like poor equipment choice and/or severe lack of practice. Several times? First he has a pistol with manual safeties in a inferior location. Second, and as far as I know, "several years ago" still places Marshall in plainclothes. This begs the question of why he is carrying a decocked DA/SA auto, concealed, with the safety engaged. His particular fumbling, several times, indicates lack of familiarity with his manual of arms. Marshall should be carrying DAO so as to not worry about fumbling a decocker it seems.:rolleyes:

Turns out the guy wasn't a hostile, but just a mushroom who had been overlooked.

Wasn't a hostile? Then it begs why Marshall drew on him. A mushroom who had been overlooked? Overlooked by whom? This reinforces the theory that uniforms had swept an area previously containing hostiles, Marshall knew it, and Marshall relaxed, secure in the knowledge that he knew his weapon.:what:

Marshall, IIRC, switched to a SIG after that encounter

Hopefully a DAO one given his demonstrated skill level with a DA/SA. He should be happy he hasn't fumbled a trigger several times already.

Easy to pick on Marshall. He did a bad study, and he's foolish enough to discuss an error he made with the public.

That saccarhin causes cancer,(ahem-if you eat a traincar load in your lifetime), is a "bad study." Continuously publishing demonstrably false statistics and defending one's wilfull innumeracy is tantamount to a being a liar. Creating "case studies" out of "reports" that cannot be verified in the jurisdictions they were allegedly taking place only reinforces the reputation for prevaricating that Marshall has richly earned.

Boats (who certainly has never fumbled anything in his life) can feel pretty good about tearing down a noted police officer who had the audacity to both screw up, and be honest about it.

As said, honesty is in the eye of the beholder, and as any cop knows who has ever testified in a criminal case, get caught lying once, the rest of your testimony is suspect.


I guess one first needs to decide if you are a man like Boats (without error) or a man like Marshall, who makes small mistakes, even at critical times. I imagine Marshall learned from the experience and carried his Smith with the safety off from then on.

If one makes "small mistakes" "several times" pulling one's gun one of the few times it was ever needed, perhaps one shouldn't tout one's self as an "expert" and instead check himself in for some basic refresher training. Changing weapons didn't cure the disease here, it masked the symptom. One need not be perfect to point that out.

However, even incompetents have their defenders.

[edited for formatting error]

[Shaughn Leayme]

Manual safety yes or no.

I can take them or leave them.

I have the thumb swipe motion down pat and do it on revolvers and other pistols with no safety. Find I even do it on rifles on occasion.

I am an ardent supporter of the 1911 and made it my choice to carry. That does not mean it is suitable for others.

The presence of a safety or the lack of one does not the ultimate weapon make.

It comes down to one common denominator.....The user.

[Graystar]

If it is a decocker, and not a safety decocker, the gun would fire. So what would be the problem? Oh, no problem, just asking :) I've never owned a gun like that.

[1911Tuner]

Handy, the kudos was for having the logic and clear thought
to realize that the Definitive Study wasn't very definitive.
Not picking on either of the authors...They tried to give us
good information based on what was available to them,
though it was flawed. I've encountered so many knowledgeable
people who quote those figuers as if they were absolute
gospel, that I stand and cheer whenever I encounter one who
has the presence of mind to understand that there just aren't any
guarantees.

So I say...Kudos to you, sir...
Tuner

[Mike Irwin]

Whatever floats your boats, Boats.

Use the recounting in any way you see fit in an attempt to further the agenda against Evan Marshall instead of keeping to the spirit of the original discussion.

I guess Marshall should have consulted you before he picked his duty weapon.

[Handy]

1911tuner,

Do a search in the General Handgun forum. You'll find a disertation there by me, and others, about everything that's wrong with studying "one shot stops".

[ebenw]

For those that are familiar enough with pistols to know how to be safe with them... a safety is only an additional measure. If the pistol is a DA/SA, I wouldn't bother with the safety, unless the mere fact that the manufacturer included it was for necessity, and not politics. If not the former, disregard the safety on the DA.

Trigger guards are there to keep things from snagging on the trigger. Some guns have only a trigger spur (no trigger guard), but these are all SA.

That said, keeping your finger out of the trigger guard is a better safety than any complexifying contrivance like a safety lever.

BTW, some departments train their officers to holster and snap in a loaded, chambered safety-off DA/SA. This is also the case with the M9 (92F) in the military.

[jmbg29]

Manual SafetyWhatever works for the person using it I guess.

Earlier this week there was a thread about an ND in a police video. Las Vegas P.D. if memory serves.

The gun was a Beretta. Has a manual safety. Dummy put a round into the ground next to the perps head. Just seconds before, she was pointing the Beretta w/manual safety at her partner.

Good thing she had a manual safety. Right? :rolleyes: :scrutiny: :uhoh: :barf: :banghead:

[Gordy Wesen]

Don't think I'll ever forget the video of the store owner who responded to an armed robery by pulling his gun and getting the drop on the bg's. You could see him jerk the trigger but it was "on safe". BG raised his gun and killed him.

[sm]

Way before now CR Sam would have said:

"Revolver for defence, 1911 for offense".
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I like the 1911, not afraid of C&L, I even swipe the "non-exist safety" on a revolver or DAO. Personal choice that do not own or have practiced much with the DA/SA . Yep, I hope I never have to draw again, much less fire...I didn't forget the safety on the 1911 when 'situations' occured before.

Personal choice an individual has to make--regardless of choice practice, train , repeat.

[Boats]

"The original spirit of the discussion. . . ?"

The spirit of this discussion seems to be skunk spraying between those who are saying two distinctly different things that are never going to have a meeting of the minds.

The first group, of which I am evidently a camper, is that a manual safety, particularly a frame mounted one, presents no peculiar difficulty under stress to the trained user. By extension, if someone wants to dabble with multiple manuals of arms, is a klutz before stress is added to the mix, can't walk and chew gum at the same time, or won't commit to learning one's safety until he or she is swiping a phantom safety off on revolvers or rifles, then go ahead and join the other camp because no one is going to get them over their fear of leaving the safety on at a crucial moment.

The opposition camp seems dedicated to the principle of, "Since I am an imperfect human duffer who would have, has had, or has heard of, trouble with a manual safety, everyone else is too, no matter their direct experience on the matter, therefore my safetyless approach is the one for everybody."

Good luck on the proselytizing. We manual safety heretics are just going to have to weed ourselves out of the gene pool freezing up and missing the little bitty lever several times in self-defense shootings, starving to death because we can't hit the crossbolt on shotguns or rifles in time to bag game birds or other game when startled, and then not living to tell about our swordpoint conversions to the one true path.
:rolleyes:

[jmbg29]

The spirit of this discussion seems to be skunk spraying between those who are saying two distinctly different things that are never going to have a meeting of the minds.Actually there is at least one other camp. That camp (of which I am a member) says that people should use whatever works best for them.

[Delmar]

jmbg29

people should use whatever works best for them.

Partypooper

[Andrew Wyatt]

I agree with that.


I still would like to know, however if the people who have problems with working a safety 1. shoot/carry the same gun all the time and 2. shoot it often.


i have a feeling those who have problems are casual carryiers, who only carry when they think they'll need it.

[Handy]

I don't think anyone is arguing that Boats is going to get killed because of the manual safety.

This is a general question, and comes with general answers and reasons.

As such, the DA crowd is mainly arguing that IF there could be a choice of only one or the other, getting rid of the safety would likely be a safer course.

We're saying this because it is simpler. Period.


There are two arguments for safeties. One involves losing control of your gun, which is an argument we should all be embarrased of. The other is that a safety allows the use of a really light trigger to facilitate more accurate shooting, which is realistic.

So I see this as a balance of simplicity vs. first shot accuracy. As we are all fond of calling pistols "defensive weapons", I'm firmly in the simplicity camp, and if I had to impose my will on a LE dept or military, it would be a DA gun, sans safety.


Making this into a personal thing where you feel insulted because of the generalizations offered (which are implicit in the question) is foolhardy. There will always be both varieties.

[Boats]

In my view, the "debate" as it were, is between those likely to panic and those likely to remain calm.

Just look at the second posting DA defender in this thread:

I agree with Handy, I don't want to have to think about anything other than pulling the trigger if I am attacked. I would also add that I am not fond of DA/SA guns for defensive purposes; I don't want the additional operation of lowering a hammer following a gun fight. I have never been involved in a gun fight but I am certain that in the event I ever was I would be quite shaken up afterwards and the less I have to remember to make the gun safe the better. I realize that this doesn't hold true for everyone, I can only assume my own reactions, therefore all of my defensive guns are either DA revolvers or DAO pistols. I leave my DA/SA and SA pistols for recreational shooting.

I think that about sums it up. The whole two times I had to ready a firearm for action were in the Navy, but the lessons of constant drilling were also imparted to me there. Remarkably enough, after a sprint to General Quarters, I didn't forget the charging handle on Ma Deuce before engaging Iranian motorboat borne attackers. The other time involved having to take shots at a magnetic mine as a navagation hazard. I somehow:rolleyes: remembered to both adjust the range on the sights of the M-14 and lock and load in under a handful of seconds. Gee, could drilling make that possible? Could constant practice (even dry firing) negate the need to "think" about proper employment of the firearm? Go figure. Such feats of "not forgetting under stress" seem unfathomable to some here though they are quite routine--hell, they are a product of routine.

[Handy]

Boats,

Well, I already asserted that it doesn't have to be a MENTAL failing - one's thumb could simply slip in a critical moment.

Your insistance on the infallibility of training goes entirely contrary to my military aviation training; the only reason to ADD a safety step is to slow one down. And never is training assumed to be the entire story - it is well known in our community that people DO make mistakes, DESPITE training.


But if you would like to write us all off as panic ridden morons, I'm sure your attitude will win many converts.

[ebenw]

I've found my DA/SA .380 to be quite cumbersome in the safety lever department, so in the interest of sparing my thumb a few blisters (from practice), I'd just as soon leave the safety alone.

Call me a lightweight, but I have better things to do than wrap fingers.

I don't mind practice, and leaving that safety alone allows me to practice more.

[Boats]

Were I trying to convert anyone at all to anything I might care how I am coming off to those who think KISS in their SD pistol is the be all end all. I don't see how these people manage to draw without fumbling, grip the pistol without accidentally dropping the mag, and locate a trigger and not wildly jerk it off target.

Maybe someday someone will invent a pistol that will have no external controls necessary at all. Won't that be the day when one can merely stab wildly with either of the first two fingers at the panic sensor area in the general location of where the trigger used to be?

As an aside, I just don't know how any military pilot has ever managed to shoot down an enemy jet. With all of the master switches, systems switches, tracking to do, and finally don't miss that button to fire. . . .:rolleyes: Thank God they actually practice not missing the buttons or losing track of where they are located.

[Handy]

Actually, that is and has been a major problem with fighter pilots. It's called task saturation and is the reason that the Top Gun school was created and that cockpits are constantly being updated to be easier to use.

One of our helicopters was ruined the other day because the pilots, who are considered top notch, didn't execute a procedure in the correct sequence due to the scary circumstance they were in. It was unusual, not exactly what they had been trained for and happened very fast. They did their best with their training, and that's why noone was hurt.

But these two excellent pilots still screwed up a four step procedure.


So, I imagine, did my friend who flew his F-18 into the Pacific. And the another friend who's body and her helicopter where never recovered from the Med.

Don't tell me well trained people don't screw up the simple stuff. I work with the best trained people in the world, and they make errors.

[Dobe]

Perhaps the complication of a cockpit may be extreme when comparing it to the simple activation of a safety. Units that practice CQB deal with safeties and guns routinely. They make it work. I am not currently in the military, so I will relate situations of which I am currently familiar.

I have hunted since I was six years old. Of course at that young of an age, I was unarmed and simply followed my father into the woods in pursuit of squirrels, ducks, etc. But as I grew, I was handed a BB gun, a pellet gun, and eventually a single barrel .410, a 20 ga. auto, then others. This led to high power rifles, pistols, and a lot of hunting.

I have killed deer, squirrels, ducks, etc by "jumping" them. In all of this time and hunting experience, I have yet to miss a safety or forgot to cock those pieces that needed cocking. It happens so fast, that one never realizes the process.

The same happens to anyone who practices handguns. It is a matter of repetition.

[TheMariner]

Safety or no safety... whether it is nobler to suffer a mechanical device you should never truly trust for the sake of social mores or to say no.

My brain is my safety. If my weapon clears its holster under my will, something is about to suffer a FMJ slug. Otherwise, my baby stays seated. Manual safeties are something man should have never invented. It creates some sense that the weapon is incapable of discharge. A deadly mistake.

I bought my Walther because there is no manual safeties... It helps to impress the idea that a drawn weapon will kill on command, no questions asked and no taking it back. THere is no in between in my mind. No safety to say, "hey, you can still not pull the trigger!". That thought came and went when I pulled my weapon.

[firestar]

"No.

A defense gun needs to be safe, but it also needs to be fireable under great duress. A safety is a possible hinderance to defending your life, and a more serious one than a 12 lbs. trigger.

A manual safety is not 'KISS'."

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------I agree 100%. I don't want to have to think about the safety if I want my gun to fire. I don't really like the iead of a SA gun for self defense. Unfortunatly, many of the best guns are SA with manual safeties: BHP, Star Firestar, 1911s, etc.

;)

My preference for a self defense gun would be a DA/SA with a decocker and no safety. SIG has it down perfectly but their triggers are too long for my hand.

[1911Tuner]

Bravo, sir. Bravo!

The mechanical safety is nothing more than a backup for the times that we have a brainfart, and should never be trusted
to keep the inept from killing themselves or others. The
real safety is the trigger finger, which should never be on the
trigger until we intend to pull it.

Thank you for speaking the simple truth!

Tuner

[Handy]

1911tuner,


Are you saying that you, following the Mariner's logic, don't carry a gun with the safety engaged?

[1911Tuner]

Nope. I engage it...I just don't rely on for an excuse for
bein' stupid with a gun...:eek:

T

[DF357]

if you carry with the safety off and a LEO wants your gun for whatever reason??

Do you put the safety on before you give it to him, possibly making him worry about what you're doing as you retreive it from your holster or do you give it to him with safety off?

Personally I'd rather have it on when giving it to him but not at the expense of a panicked cop who hears the safety clickingand doesn't know what I'm doing.

What to do...what to do?????

[firestar]

Don't give your gun to a cop, thats "what to do".:p Let him get his own gun. Parasites.:barf:

[DF357]

to get his own gun !

Yeah right, I've already got three hots and a cot in a place of my own choosing and I like it like that !

[LiquidTension]

I prefer a manual safety, but it is not required for me to purchase a carry gun. I have no problem carrying a Sig or the likes. I DO like to have an exposed hammer, though. I train with my carry gun (1911), so I don't worry about forgetting the safety if I ever have to use it. The motion is automatic for me when I draw the pistol (I practice every day at home - unloaded, of course). This is another one of those questions that has no right or wrong answer, just depends on what you like and what you train with.

[firestar]

Handy has some weird ideas and he upsets many people but I think he is right on the money most of the time. As much as people like the 1911, it is NOT the ultimate defense handgun by any means.

I don't understand why it is so hard to understand that adding safety levers and other things that stop your gun from firing when you want it to is a bad idea. Why have them? We don't need them, so why add complexity to an already complex situation?

[Andrew Wyatt]

As much as people like the 1911, it is NOT the ultimate defense handgun by any means.


For you maybe. The 1911 is the only major caliber semi-auto that'll fit in my hand, and i seem to be able to make it work

[P95Carry]

True Andrew ... and this supports this ''individual'' nature of choices.

My P97 would seem horrendous perhaps to 1911 fans and officionado's .. and yet for me . it shoots every bit as good as my buddy with his 1911 .. it certainly is very much ''what suits the individual .... for sure.:)

[BevrFevr]

There is a good reason to have a safety on some guns for some uses.

In my view it has very little to do with quick drawing on some guy in a 7-11.

It also doesn't have a thing to do with the trigger guard or "my Brain is my safety"(some are safer than others if you know what I mean) Actually, some of the dumbest people I've ever met use that as thier mantra. It doesn't make me feel safer at all.

It's about something, anything, activating the trigger when the trigger should not be activated. Yes, sure safeties can fail, but so can everything else.

Thinking that a safety will give you a false sense of security is silly. Do you check the bore for obstructions every single time you draw your weapon(how about under pressure)? If you don't you have a false sense of security. Do you weigh each and every bullet to make sure there is not a double charge? There is your false sense of security again.

Your safety could fail... but so could your sear...even in your holster. Even with your trigger finger shoved safely up your...

nose.

Both kinds of guns kill good guys and bad guys all day every day. To think one is better than the other is just silly. It depends on a lot of variables. Who, Where, Why, How Many, How Long, did I or didn't I, Did they......ad infinitum.

-bevr

[Pico]

I am still not convinced a manual safety will make my gun safer. There have been a lot of arguments submitted in this thread based on nostalgia related to the 1911 and the way we used to do it with such and such in this and that, etc, etc. I respect everyone and their opinions on either side of this thing but....

The bottom line is no amount of training means anything if that safety is in the wrong position at the wrong time. if you rely on it alone and not use other basic safety skills instead, sooner or later you will have an AD or a click when you need to hear a bang.
Finger off the trigger unless you are going to shoot is a universal
safety practice for all firearms that works pretty damn well.

People are human and they **** up occasionally and make inevitable mistakes. I don't care what your skill level is, you can still mess up, especially in the heat of the moment. I wouldn't want anyone to think I'm perfect by any means and unable to make mistakes with a firearm or anything else. Some members of this forum seem to think they are incapable of error. That state of mind is the most dangerous thing of all and needs to be reconsidered.

Don't forget, John Browning didn't have the slide lock on his original design of the 1911. He was content with the grip safety. The slide lock was added after it was requested from the government. Love or hate Glock as you will, everyone must admit his design featuring no manual safety has had great success in the last 20 years and it ain't just because he sells 'em cheap to the cops.

Pico

[TheMariner]

BevrFevr,

"Actually, some of the dumbest people I've ever met use that as thier mantra. It doesn't make me feel safer at all. "


Well, if they're the dumbest peeps you met, you probably didn't want them holding a weapon at all, eh? Thus, their views on proper safety are mute.

My walther is carried in DA status most of the time... thus the striker is forward and nothing but the mag spring is under tension.... Nothing can go boom unless I make that LONG trigger squeeze...

[New_comer]

I have a handgun with a manual safety, but I retain option of not using it, should I so desire.



Just don't have that option with a Glock/XD/Kahr...



The best of both worlds... ;):neener::evil:

[Boats]

That Glock left the manual safety off of his pistols is a mark of genius?


Um, sure, like the world had never seen DAO before. . . .:confused:

[1911Tuner]

Don't forget, John Browning didn't have the slide lock on his original design of the 1911. He was content with the grip safety. The slide lock was added after it was requested from the government.

Thassa fact, Jack!

[Boats]

I thought it was the thumb safety that was added, not the slide lock.:confused:

[Handy]

He meant thumb safety.

[jc2]

Out of curiosity -- wasn't it the grip safety that was added at the Army's insistence rather than the thumb safety. I think all of JMB's previous designs included the thumb safety, and I know he retained the thumb safety on the P35, but he dropped the grip safety.

[Handy]

I've heard eight different versions of this, but I think that both items were additions, first the grip, than the manual.

Remember, the 1911 started out as a cock-on-the-draw weapon to be used by cavalry who were shooting Colt SAAs. Browning's gun was no more complicated externally.


And the P35 design was heavily worked over by the FN engineer. Who knows how JMB would have built it. He used grip safeties in several pistols.

[Pico]

Sorry folks, I meant thumb safety not slide lock. A slide lock )or release) is too logical an idea to come from the government.

I always heard the thumb safety was added later at the request of the military. It looks like more of an add on than the grip safety but who knows?

Lately for my next gun, I've been looking at the XD( HS2000) more and more. I like the idea of a grip safety and internal safeties. Maybe this is the kind of pistol Browning would build today...

Pico

[BevrFevr]

Mariner,

Well, if they're the dumbest peeps you met, you probably didn't want them holding a weapon at all, eh? Thus, their views on proper safety are mute.

Well the fact is they do hold guns so thier views on guns safety count to all of us.

Newcomer,

I have a handgun with a manual safety, but I retain option of not using it, should I so desire.

Well said. It is nice to have the option. I do not carry. I may have shot too many revolvers for too long but it is more instinct to me to cock the hammer back on drawing. That method was used for several hundred years.

I like DA shooting too. I also like using a safety. I like SA only too.
That goes for revolvers too. Some I like DA and some I like SA. Never consider myself vulnerable in a gunfight regardless of design. If people feel a safety puts them at a disadvantage it probably does but not me. BrainFarts or not.




This is a great debate and all but me thinks (pure speculation) that far more people are accidently shot by glocks and other safety less guns than people are injured and killed because they forgot to flick off a safety on a quick draw. Probably much more.

I'm not glock bashing I have decided to eventually get a Glock and it was a close call when I bought my last auto. I don't however think I will be at any particular advantage with it though. I may go with an XD though cause I just like the thought of having an off switch.

-bevr

[Pico]

I think if today you could bring back Browning and put a top of the line Kimber .45 and a Glock on the table in front of him, he'd smile, pick up the Kimber and nod. Then he'd look at the Glock and say, "Hey, let me see that one."

Sorry gents, I guess I need to get a reality check.

I've shot a Glock or two and they shoot pretty good, no surprises. I think most people that bash them haven't shot them same as people who bash any gun. The XD especially in the 5 inch size looks pretty appealing to me all of a sudden.

Pico

[1911Tuner]

Pico, I think you'd be betting on a sure thing. I believe that
the grand old man would be keenly interested in new designs,
no matter who came up with them, and what they looked like.
His passion was in the designing.

I also believe that he would tear the glock down and think:
"Hmmm. What can I do to make this better?"

Astute observation...and also right on the money, I think.

Tuner

[jc2]

He'd also notice that he designed a lot of it.

[RON in PA]

No!
Nein!
Neyt!
Non!

I carry a revolver, nuff said.

[Pico]

No argument that a good wheelgun is a good gun period. Also, they really don't have a manual safety. The Smith 8 shooter I saw in the gun rag in .357 would be welcome at my address anytime.

I'm trying to imagine the same scenario I described with Sam Colt seeing a single action army in 44-40 and a Taurus Raging Bull in 44 mag in front of him on the table.

OK, enough. Call my shrink in. Thanks for the replys.

Pico

[TheMariner]

QUOTE

Well the fact is they do hold guns so thier views on guns safety count to all of us.- BevrFevr

Count? no. Require Correction? yes... People who believe such are a danger to themselves and those around them... their views don't count for anything except another statistic one day if someone doesn't teach them proper safety... It all about four basic rules my father taught me. I believe the NRA advises some similiar set of rules but it has been awhile since I've read them.

Keep it down range WHEN DRAWN
Keep you finger out of the trigger area until ready to fire
Don't point at anything you DON'T intend to shoot
Know target and beyond

Not a single accident yet in eleven years by following these rules.

QUOTE

Thinking that a safety will give you a false sense of security is silly. Do you check the bore for obstructions every single time you draw your weapon(how about under pressure)? If you don't you have a false sense of security. Do you weigh each and every bullet to make sure there is not a double charge? There is your false sense of security again.

Your safety could fail... but so could your sear...even in your holster. Even with your trigger finger shoved safely up your...

nose.

-BevrFevr

Do I check my weapon before each use? Yeah, don't you? But ofcourse, mine while at my home, sits in a case by itself... Nothing to damage or obstruct.

Do I examine my ammunition? Ofcourse...I examine every single round of ammunition once a month and/or just before a range visit to ensure the ammuntion is not apparently defective. I don't weight it but then again, if the gun goes completely BOOM because of a bad round (chances are more likely I'll die in a plane accident), oh well, not something I'm responsible for. But to be responsible for someone else's death because "I think it was...." No. Not on my watch. I take responsibility for as much danger as I can and minimize it by not buying from questionable ammo sources and reading up every time I go buy ammo to see if there have been recent problems with a lot # or manufacturer.




QUOTE

re: Mariner's logic
Nope. I engage it...I just don't rely on for an excuse for
bein' stupid with a gun...
- 1911Tuner

Stupidity is ever drawing loaded weapon without the intent to shoot or in some manner as to bring anything outside fo the intended target undue danger... Drawing in a SD situation without being fully committed to pulling the trigger only causes more problems than it solves.

THere is no such thing as quarter to a criminals. If he sees me draw a weapon a sight in and decides to drop his own weapon, fine then. I'm not going to shoot him. But if the three little dots line up and the person(s) are still acting in a threatening manner, the decision on whether to shoot or not is already done with... I'll deal with whatever the messed up justice system will throw at me after I'm sure I did my best to ensure the innocent people around me live to see another day.

[Erik]

Yes!

errrrr....

No!

errrrr....

I haven't made up my mind, apparently.

I have yet to find myself at any detriment execpt that on occassion I find my gun hand thumb riding an imaginary thumb safety where there is none. A big deal? Not really. I self correct and move on.

[Snaps]

I like it just because most of my guns have them. I was really against a carry gun without it until the guy pointed out hat I was had a revolver at the time with no safety. :banghead:
I don't really think it makes a difference now.