M&P magazine disconnect removal


July 23, 2008, 05:13 PM
Is there any simple way to do this. I have looked at the mechanism and compared it to my .45 which doesn't have one and it looks like it should be simple to overcome. However I thought I would ask here first.

If you enjoyed reading about "M&P magazine disconnect removal" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
July 23, 2008, 06:54 PM
i know it's doable. hopefully someone with the knowledge will chime in soon. good luck.

July 24, 2008, 06:45 PM

It's in there somewhere.

Chris Rhines
July 26, 2008, 08:35 AM
I'm surprised no one else has chimed in here - removing the M&P magazine disconnect is a piece of cake.

First, go here and download the trigger job instructions. http://www.burwellgunsmithing.com/misc/M&Ptriggerjob.pdf Read them over, to get an idea of how the trigger mechanism comes apart.

Check that your gun is unloaded. Field strip it normally. Use a hammer and roll pin punch to drive the sear block roll pin out of the frame. Carefully pry the sear block up and out of the frame, then pull it off the trigger bar.

Look at the sear block. The front-most pin holds the yellow sear deactivation lever, and the silver magazine disconnect. Push the pin out, remove the magazine disconnect, and throw it away. You'll need to find a small spring or something to replace it with, so as to hold the sear deactivation lever in place.

That's it. Reassemble and test.

- Chris

July 26, 2008, 10:19 AM
I know lots of folks disagree, but I wouldn't do it.

I've never been involved in a shooting incident and, like most of us, it's my fervent prayer that I never will be.

But many of the folks whose opinions I've read who teach the defensive use of firearms and virtually all of the ones from those who regularly work on both sides of the criminal and civil court systems agree that if you do have to shoot someone, it's a virtual certainty that somebody's going sue you.

Mas Ayoob and a slew of others with a heckuva lot more direct experience with the consequences of actual cases have seen the 'issue' of having "deactivated a safety device" raised repeatedly in actual cases and strongly advise against giving the plaintiff's attorney any opportunity to muddy the waters with it.

They also mention the very different legal standards of proof between criminal and civil court actions and some of the ways they've seen a slick litigator try and use those to generate enough sympathy and 'reasonable doubt' in the minds of a majority of a jury to win a judgement.

Given that it's highly unlikely that anyone will volunteer to be defending me (or you) 'pro bono' or on a contingency basis, and that the plaintiff's attorney is almost certain to be operating that way, why even contemplate doing something that's liable to encourage one to try?

July 26, 2008, 10:29 AM
I have heard that argument made a number of times but I have never heard a single case where it has ever been brought up in court for a Criminal or Civil trial. In addition S&W makes the same gun without the Magazine disconnect therefore the gun can not be said to be unsafe or more dangerous without it. Changing this is about the equivalent of changing out the beavertail safety on a 1911.

July 26, 2008, 11:41 AM
Azizza, just because you haven't heard of it doesn't mean that it hasn't happened. Believe whatever you'd like but if you'll do a little reading in the back issues of "American Handgunner" for Mas Ayoob's "The Ayoob Files" column and in several of his other published works you'll find that it has been, and on more than a couple of cases.

If you want case names, numbers and particulars you can look 'em up there. I'm darned if I'll do it for you just to try and convince you not to do something I wouldn't do. It's your butt and future; risk them as you will.

FWIW, the point would be that if the feature was there when it was originally manufactured, and you removed it, whether another model of the same basic weapon has one or not has no relevance whatsoever.

What will be argued is that it was an additional 'safety' feature on the one on the evidence table (your gun!), you willfully and negligently deactivated it and that contributed materially to poor Mr. Scumbag ending up in that wheelchair for life.

It doesn't have to be technically correct for him to be able to pose a credible argument on the point, especially to the right jury.

And, with respect, I'd argue that replacing a safety device is in no way "equivalent" to deactivating one. On the 1911, 'pinning' that grip safety would be the equivalent, and would put you in the same frying pan at a trial.

Mr. Ayoob is a member on this forum and, while he undoubtedly has better things do do with his time, he might even respond to a PM or add a comment here if you ask politely.

July 26, 2008, 03:30 PM
Mainmech I really find your tone quite condescending, rude, and insulting. I understand that we disagree on this but you could be a bit more respectful about it.

July 27, 2008, 01:11 PM
I did add "with respect", and please bear in mind that how you choose to perceive the tone or manner of my comments and/or observations might well differ radically from my intent in offering them.

I can't, and don't, know how much personal experience you may have had with the way things are really done in civil litigation or criminal proceedings these days. While my own has been gratefully limited to the civil end, what there has been was a truly rude awakening for me as far as how radically the reality differed from the way it's depicted television, my preconceptions of the way "things should be" and as it was presented in Civics class.

As you know, we have more lawyers per capita than anywhere else in the world. The resulting intense competition seems to bring out the worst in many people and, from what I've observed, the factors of rampant greed, personal ambitions and political agendae into the equation seems to be playing a large role in how the 'game' is being played.

IMHO, the term "Civil Litigation" has become a complete oxymoron and the way that many decisions as to whether or not to instigate criminal charges and just how agressively they're to be prosecuted has become more a matter of personal convenience, personal aggrandizement and the potential for advancing personal political causes or careers than "justice" as it was once defined.

And again in MHO, those of us who choose to include the means for the application of lethal force into our personal defensive options need to give a good deal of time and effort to indentifying as many of the tactics used against those who've faced that "Gravest Extreme" and plan for how we might go about "short-stopping" as many of them as we possibly can in case we should ever find ourselves in similar jeopardy.

I would suggest, again respectfully that, for your own sake and that of those who depend on you, you take some time look into the published data and satisfy yourself as to the existence of actual case law where the defendant's actions, specifically regarding alterations to "as-manufactured" features of a firearm have been a factor in the decision to pursue criminal and/or civil action against them and/or the eventual outcome of those cases before you dismiss the possibility out-of-hand or draw conclusions from comparisons demonstrably false-to-fact.

I sincerely believe that you will pardon me for whatever personal umbrage your perceptions as to the tone or intention of my remarks may have caused you once have looked into the substance of them and found it, while perhaps harshly presented, to be both valid and truthfull.

Mr. Ayoob is a highly knowlegable and respected authority on both the application and consequences of lethal force with decades of experience garnered from his participation as an expert witness and consultant in actual cases. He has perhaps more direct experience in court actions of this type than any other man now alive. He has repeatedly documented and published what he's witnessed of the tactics and practices used by both sides of the bar over those years and his opinions and insights on the subject are highly regarded and sought after by the attorneys who pratice there. IMO, the conclusions he's drawn may be sobering and at odds with what we'd like to believe, but prudence and self-preservation should compell one to read and consider them carefully before betting the farm on what might turn out to have been wishfull thinking.

If you enjoyed reading about "M&P magazine disconnect removal" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!