[voilsb]

So I was thinking ... the 92FS is a pretty safe firearm, and I was considering moving to a cocked-and-unlocked carrying posture. Is a 92FS really any less safe than a Glock when carried this way? I wouldn't think so, but figured I'd ask around a little first, to see if people have some good intel.

[tbeb]

No pistol is safe to carry cocked and unlocked!

The Beretta 92FS is designed to be carried with a round in the chamber and the hammer decocked.

With a round in the chamber (and your finger off the trigger), the Glock has three automatic safeties and they are: 1. Trigger safety; 2. firing pin safety; and 3. drop safety.

[Tamara]

Trigger travel in SA mode on the Beretta is shorter and lighter, the mainspring is storing the full amount of energy needed to bust the cap, and there's nothing to prevent slight side loads on the trigger (such as from a snug holster) bumping the trigger enough to trip the sear. :scrutiny:

But, hey, it's a free country and they're your butt cheeks; whatever floats your boat. ;)


(If it was me? Not in a million, billion, gazillion years. :uhoh: )

[Ala Dan]

I concur with tbeb, that "NO Pistol Is Safe In The Cocked
And Unlocked Mode"!:( (The frown represents how persons
would feel about anyone carrying a self-loader in this type
of condition).

The Beretta 92FS is a very safe firearm, provided that one
follows the instructions as issued with each firearm. With
that said, its common knowledge amongest veteran LEO's
that a when a Beretta 92FS is grabbed by a perp; the
officer's survival chances increase if the weapon is toted
as per instructions. The theory is that perps unfamiliar with
a Beretta's operation, would be delayed because of all the
gadget's on this firearm. In reality, the best preventive
measure is "weapon retention"; don't let the bad guy
snatch your firearm in the first place!:D :rolleyes: :)

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

[Chugach]

Wouldn't recommend it. An excellent setup for a negligent discharge. Microtravel of the trigger and you've fired a round.

Don't know about you, but I sometimes have enough holster lint to move a trigger that far...:p

[clubsoda22]

here's an idea. Load op a few magazines and go to the range, practice double taps with a DA/SA transtion all day. decock, double tap, decock, doubletap. You'll be supprised how good you'll get.

[10-Ring]

I wouldn't...nope, not a good idea at all ;)

[voilsb]

clubsoda22 said:
here's an idea. Load op a few magazines and go to the range, practice double taps with a DA/SA transtion all day. decock, double tap, decock, doubletap. You'll be supprised how good you'll get.This is what prompted me to ask about it. I was at the range today, practicing such, and I noticed about half the time I would pull as if SA three or four times, and never get a round off because it was still in DA mode.

Most of what was posted here, however, was specifically why I currently carry de-cocked. Because I wasn't sure how much travel can happen with that trigger during normal carrying and such. However, knowing it's a relatively safe firearm, I figured I'd ask around.

As for the "no firearm is safe cocked and unlocked," which may be true, that doesn't seem to stop the many many people who carry Glocks (or any other SA or LDA firearm without an external safety) cocked and unlocked. Which, again, was part of why I asked this question.

On a different note, I vaguely remember hearing about a mod for the 92 which disables the de-cocking feature of the saftey, allowing you to carry cocked-and-locked, which may be another option.

[C.R.Sam]

I wouldn't

Sam

[SelfProclaimedExpert]

It's interesting to read the various warnings and apply them to other guns:
No pistol is safe to carry cocked and unlocked!
So what does one do with a Springfield XD or Steyr M, which are cocked but have no manual safety?
the mainspring is storing the full amount of energy needed to bust the cap
Like on a 1911, who's safety lever doesn't block that cocked hammer, only the tiny sear that holds it.

I think it's funny that cocking a Beretta, which has a drop safety and a 5 pound SA trigger with some takeup, is an obvious no-no, but putting a 3.5 pound connector in a Glock makes for a sweet carry gun.

If Beretta covered the hammer up and put a longer take up in the SA trigger we'd all be discussing the new "Beretta Good Safe Helper Trigger". Whoopee, it's tactical!

Why is this so obviously dumb, and alot of other stuff we've been sold in the last 15 years the finest developments in firearms?

[denfoote]

Here, I thought you were talking about the Taurus PT92, which can be safely carried COCKED AND LOCKED!!

This feature makes the PT92 a much better pistol than the POS Beretta!!!! :barf:

[timbo]

Don't look at me, I like uncocked and locked. Then again, I don't carry either.

[Tecolote]

A better 92FS is unsafe to carry cocked and unlocked. A Glock has three safeties that must be disengaged by pulling the trigger. It's not the same thing as a cocked and unlocked 92FS. I wouldn't carry a 1911 cocked and unlocked even if it does have the grip safety. If you aren't happy with a 92FS look into other models. Don't rely on an unsafe carry mode to make for any shortcomings.

[Chuck Perry]

The XD has a grip safety that must be depressed before the pistol will fire. The Steyr M has a manual safety mounted inside the trigger guard in the twelve o clock position.

[4v50 Gary]

I got lost with the letters but wasn't the original Beretta 92 a cock and lock firearm? The F series did have the decocking safety but the earlier ones were interchangeable (slide & frame) with the Taurus.

BTW, on the FS series, I concur with everyone in that it should not be carried cocked and lock.

[El Tejon]

Have seen condition zero used in skul before. As long as the Golden Rule is observed, barring a bump or grind, one MIGHT be O.K.

IMO, no way, Jose!:eek:

[Amish]

Tecolote the three Glock safeties are actually just two. The trigger within the trigger is just a marketing label/hype for a part that just works the other two safeties, which are the firing pin block and drop safety which always doesn't work. Putting a so called safety on the trigger is like putting Bin Laden inside the White House. All guns need to have the trigger pulled to fire. If you haven't noticed SIG's, Beretta's, HK's, and other guns have those basic safeties. Glock has no special external safety features. Actually Glocks are less safer since they have a light DA pull, which isn't much different from a slightly heavy SA pull. Also Glocks will fire slightly out of battery.

Some people here need to learn how other guns besides Glock work. A cocked Beretta or a SIG will only fire if the trigger is pulled AND if it's pulled all the way, which is impossible to do while in a holster. The firing pin is blocked until the trigger is pulled in DA and SA pull. If the hammer is accidently bumped and disengages from the sear, it will fall to the half cocked position. A Beretta will NOT accidently discharge. Carrying a Glock with round in the chamber is no safer than carrying a cocked Beretta or SIG around. Actually a cocked and locked HK USP is safer than both. I would carry my Beretta Elite II cocked anytime. How many stories of accidental discharges have you hear about with Glocks? How many have you heard about with the M9 or LE Beretta's or SIG's or HK's?

[Chugach]

A cocked Beretta or a SIG will only fire if the trigger is pulled AND if it's pulled all the way, which is impossible to do while in a holster.

I respectfully disagree. Guess it depends on your definition of "while in a holster". If your pistol has been inserted safely and it is at rest, there is minimal risk of discharge if the holster is of sound construction. But how does the pistol get into the holster? Have you ever had a holster mouth collapse or a piece of fabric from your cover garment intrude into your pistol's trigger guard?

For that reason, I always rest my thumb on my pistol's or revolver's external hammer as I holster. Back of hammer if piece is "decocked", overlapping the front of the hammer lightly if "cocked-and-locked". That way, I can sense even small hammer movement rearwards or forwards and take corrective action.

I don't trust half-cock catches. And for those handguns with no external hammer, I'm exceedingly careful of what I do when I holster.

[Dave T]

When you carry a Glock with a round chambered it is not "cocked". The firing pin is partially cocked but does not have enough inertia from that position to set off a primer - given that the other two safeties would allow it to go forward, which they won't. You people are compairing apples and oranges.

As for all the "accidental discharges" with Glocks, every single one involves somebody pulling the trigger, whether they admit it or not. Combat Tupperware won't fire otherwise!

[Tecolote]

The Glock safety isn't a marketing ploy. You can't fire a properly working Glock without fulling depressing the small latch built within the trigger. It's one thing not to like Glocks but another to call a safety a "marketing ploy.";)

[WonderNine]

True, the B92 can't fire if the sear breaks because of the firing pin safety. The trigger must be pulled all the way to the rear for it to go off. The B92 is one of the safety pistols out there. My preMKII Hi-Power can fire if the sear breaks though.

[voilsb]

As for all the "accidental discharges" with Glocks, every single one involves somebody pulling the trigger, whether they admit it or not.
That's another way of phrasing it. The Beretta has a firing pin safety which is released when you make a DA pull, but I'm not sure if it's till active for an SA pull.

So, can a Beretta 92FS be fired without pulling the trigger? Is the trigger-activated firing pin safety still active in a SA pull?

Edited to add: I swear I posted this before, but I must have hit 'preview' and for some reason thought I'd posted it. Oops! :eek:

[Cthulhu]

To answer the original question: Is a 92FS really any less safe than a Glock when carried this way?

Yes.

As others have posted, the Glock is only partially cocked when it is carried, and has safeties that require that the trigger being squarely and fully depressed. Dave T's post sums it up well.

Most defensive instructors and schools advocate a trigger pull of 4-5 pounds as a minimum. and I haven't seen any that recommend the Glock 3.5lb connector for carry use, much less tout it as the ideal carry setup.

Carrying a 92FS condition zero is less safe. The hammer is fully cocked, and there is nothing to prevent discharge from an errant side loading from holster body, retention strap, etc.

How many stories of accidental discharges have you hear about with Glocks? How many have you heard about with the M9 or LE Beretta's or SIG's or HK's?

Accidental discharges happen in all these weapons, and are caused by defective operation of the cop's fingers, not any safety mechanism or lack thereof. Glocks seem to have more discharges due to officers failing to clear their weapon properly before attempting to strip/function check it. This is a training issue more than a design issue. Most LE are not shooting enthusiasts, and know only what training has covered. Glocks are the most commonly issued firearms in US LE service, so the fact that they have more "stories" about NDs would not be that shocking.

Could a 92, with the proper training and leather, be carried safely this way? Sure. So could a condition zero Sig, Browning, HK, or 1911. Even in the (extremely rare) instance of a outright sear breakage, firing pin blocks or half cock notches or a combination of the two would most likely prevent a discharge. That doesn't make it a good idea. Reholstering quickly would be very touchy, or slower than the conventional methods.

If you have trouble with managing the trigger in an SA/DA pistol, rather than carrying the weapon in a manner which is inherently less safe than the than TDA or C&L, either practice it until it is no longer an issue, or choose a different weapon that can use a consistent pull for every shot. Whether that is a CZ/BHP/HKUSP/1911 carried C&L, a "safe action" type such as the Glock, XD or (shudder) a DAO, such as Beretta 92G, H&K V5, P2000, is up to you.

[SelfProclaimedExpert]

Since the Beretta and Glock are both safe against internal failures and drops, due to the firing pin safety, but the Glock, XD or M are the only safe choice if the 5 lbs. mode, where does that leave the Para LDA?

Here's a gun that works like a Glock, except there is no trigger safety to insure that the gun will fire if and only if "the trigger [is] squarely and fully depressed".


If carrying a light triggered gun requires some sort of trigger or grip safety for holstering, where does that leave the LDA, Daewoo, Kahr, LEM, P99 QA, Sig K, Sigma and every other similar design (more on the way!) that has a light, unblocked trigger?

[Amish]

Once again, with the hammer cocked back on a Beretta, the firing pin block is in place and will only disengage if the slack of the SA is taken up and the trigger pulled all the way. Should the hammer disengage from the sear by blunt force, it will fall to the half cocked position. It is impossible to have an accidental discharge with a cocked Beretta. You can drop kick it cocked and it will not fire. The trigger has to pulled, so how is it less safe than a Glock, which when loaded is in a half cocked position and the pull is only slightly heavier than the SA pull on a Beretta?

How is a Glock immune to any abnormal holstering. Actually unless you wear a holster made of jelly, there is no chance in hell a cocked Beretta will fire while holstered. People who say otherwise have not owned a Beretta or know how a gun other than a Glock works. Don't believe me, I will bet anyone here $1000 plus their Glock if they loose to demostrate a cocked and holstered Beretta accidently firing or a cocked Beretta accidently firing while being holstered or taken out and i'm not taking about human error like putting your finger on the trigger, which will also discharge a Glock.

Just as I side note, I have a Glock 17 so I know how they work.

[cool45auto]

This feature makes the PT92 a much better pistol than the POS Beretta!!!!
:rolleyes:

I put a D model spacer in my Vertec so if I want I can carry it cocked with the safety on for a SA first shot after thumbing off the safety.

[WonderNine]

Should the hammer disengage from the sear by blunt force, it will fall to the half cocked position.

If the sear breaks it will probably fall all the way. But even if that is the case the firing pin safety will prevent it from falling. And if a B92 is truly converted to cocked and locked, you won't be able to pull the trigger back even by accident if the safety is on. That's what we're talking about here right? True c&l?

[JohnKSa]

Glock: Partially cocked.
Beretta: Fully cocked.

Glock: Firing pin safety.
Beretta Firing pin safety.

Glock: 5.5lb trigger
Beretta 4 to 6lb trigger

Glock: 0.4" trigger travel.
Beretta: 0.4" trigger travel.

Glock Trigger guard width minus trigger blade width: 0.22"
Beretta Trigger guard width minus trigger blade width: 0.11"

Glock: Safety Ramp holds striker from dropping into firing pin block.
Beretta: Half cock notch prevents hammer from dropping.

Glock: Trigger safety
Beretta: No trigger safety.

Glock trigger: Requires significant pull effort to start trigger moving.
Beretta trigger: Moves very easily through takeup.

So what does that mean?

The Glock isn't fully cocked. That means that if ALL the safeties and the sears on both guns fail, the Glock won't fire, the Beretta will. That sounds pretty paranoid, but there are some more likely scenarios where this difference could be an issue.

The Glock trigger safety prevents AD/NDs when only the side of the trigger is snagged. The trigger safety design also makes it unlikely that objects making initial light contact will fire trigger. The initial light contact will cause the object to slide up the trigger safety slope to the top part of the trigger where the safety can't be disengaged. A lot of people overlook the fact that the trigger safety doesn't cover the WHOLE trigger blade, only the bottom portion. Pressure at the top of the trigger (where a snag would likely ride up to and stop) can't fire the gun.

The Glock trigger guard is about two tenths of an inch wider (0.6") than the Beretta trigger guard (0.44") although the Glock trigger blade is only a hair wider than the Beretta trigger blade. That means that the Glock trigger guard overhangs the trigger blade by over a tenth of an inch on each side. The Beretta trigger guard provides only half that amount of overhang/protection on each side.

The Glock trigger pull means that it won't start moving until a decent amount of pressure is applies. The Beretta trigger moves very easily until the takeup is eliminated. That makes it more likely that something snagging the trigger on the Glock will slip off before firing the pistol. Something snagging the Beretta trigger won't meet much resistance until the last instant which will probably make it more likely to fire the pistol.

What it really comes down to is that the Glock was DESIGNED to be carried in the (chamber loaded/partially cocked/ready to fire with a trigger pull) mode. The designers made extra efforts to insure that it was as safe as possible. Some of the important design features that contribute to this, like the wider trigger guard and the trigger safety slope/trigger safety placement on the trigger aren't immediately apparent but are there when you need them.

[bountyhunter]

That's another way of phrasing it. The Beretta has a firing pin safety which is released when you make a DA pull, but I'm not sure if it's till active for an SA pull.

It sure is active for SA pull, much to the disdain of anybody who would like to have one with a short, crisp SA pull. The FP block requires considerable trigger pre-travel in SA to raise the block out of the way before the gun can fire. Long SA pull is mandatory for the Beretta design.

[SelfProclaimedExpert]

How did this become a Beretta vs. Glock only comparison?

Go back to John's list and substitute a couple other popular guns and see how they fall out on the safety comparison.

[JohnKSa]

How did this become a Beretta vs. Glock only comparison? From the initial post.Is a 92FS really any less safe than a Glock when carried this way?
I was interested to find as I compiled the information for the above list that there were more similarities than differences.

Still, the differences are telling.

Here's one reasonably likely scenario. The Beretta has a very hard hammer strike. One of the hardest in industry, IMO. I've heard of Beretta users who disassembled their slides to find that their firing pins were broken even though they had been experiencing no misfires. The high hammer energy was transferring through the back part of the broken pin to the front part with enough force to fire the cartridge reliably.

Ok, let's take someone in that situation. A broken firing pin, but no malfunctions yet, due to the extra hard hammer strike of the Beretta.

Let's say that person starts carrying cocked and unlocked. A hard bump against the hammer breaks the sear allowing the hammer to fall. Note that if the sear is actually broken, there is nothing to catch the half-cock notch. The firing pin safety is in place, but since the forward part of the firing pin is broken off, the strike of the hammer transfers through the part of the pin locked by the firing pin safety to the forward part that is free to move. Just like one of those little swinging ball desk games. So, we have a discharge in a gun that appeared to be functioning normally up until the sear was broken.

Now, is that a highly likely event? No, but it's not pathologically paranoid, either. What it comes down to is that a gun that isn't cocked (doesn't have enough tension on the main spring to fire the gun) is going to be safer than one that is.

It seems to be accepted that you need at least a treble safety to allow a cocked situation to be safe. The 1911 pistols use a half-cock notch, a grip safety and a manual safety for example. The Beretta 92 has only two active safeties when cocked. The firing pin block and the half-cock notch.

The Glock, on the other hand has a treble safety (firing pin block, a trigger safety, and an internal safety ramp which blocks the striker) even though the gun's NOT cocked.

[SelfProclaimedExpert]

So how do you feel about cocked and locked Series 70 1911s? Only one failure to fire as in your above scenerio.

[JerryN]

Glock: Trigger safety

Beretta: No trigger safety.



This is a meaningless distinction.

If you pull the trigger of a glock, it goes boom. If you pull the trigger of a Beretta, it goes boom.

The only difference you failed to mention is that if you pull the trigger of a Beretta with the safety on, it don't go boom. If you pull the trigger of a Glock it goes boom no matter what. If you snag your (as expressed here) defective holster with corners sticking out and stuff, and your glock goes off. Your Beretta doesn't.

Beretta wins this little safety issue.

[voilsb]

How did this become a Beretta vs. Glock only comparison?
From the initial post.
It wasn't meant to be. It was just the first thing that came to mind when I wrote it. I've since learned quite a bit, and tried to change the direction of the discussion to the safety of the same pistol modified to function in a cocked-and-locked (for instance, how Cool9mm had mentioend) manner.

And yes, I very much appreciate the wealth of information and discussion I've found here. I hope it continues, too.

[SelfProclaimedExpert]

It was also my impression that the Glock was a "such as...", but there was no point arguing it.

Voilsb, I hope you now feel that carrying like that is dumb. However, maybe you're wondering what else is dumb, too.

[litework]

I have a Beretta 92FS and a couple of Glocks. There is no way I would carry my 92FS without the safety engaged. There is more surface area on the Beretta's trigger. The more surface area, the greater the chance of pulling the trigger. With the Glock, you must have your finger "squarely" placed on the trigger inside the trigger in order for it to fire. With the Beretta, you can fire the gun with an indirect trigger strike. In addition, an indirect trigger strike is much easier with the Beretta, because the trigger guard is not much wider than the trigger it protects. It definitely adds to the gun's looks, but doesn't protect the trigger that much. The Glock's trigger guard is a lot wider and more protective of the trigger; you still have to depress the smaller trigger inside the main trigger. I must say that I am a little leary of holstering the Glock; I now prefer the Springfield XD system with the grip safety.

[voilsb]

Voilsb, I hope you now feel that carrying like that is dumb. However, maybe you're wondering what else is dumb, too.
Yeah, that's basically why I was asking about CnL mods.

Currently, I carry chambered, uncocked, safety off (because of the monsterous DA pull). I'm thinking (if it's reasonably safe) to move to CnL.

Of course, when I have a bit more spare money, I'll get a compact 1911 and maybe an XD, too. Then I won't have to worry about this discussion.

But it's cool learning about some of the other things, too. For instance, this is the first thread I've seen where the Glock trigger-safety actually sounds like it does something useful. Thanks for the G2!

[SelfProclaimedExpert]

I'll get a compact 1911

After all this, you want to carry a cocked gun with no firing pin safety and a safety that blocks the sear, not the hammer?

I guess safety is in the mind of the beholder.

[JohnKSa]

The only difference you failed to mention is that if you pull the trigger of a Beretta with the safety on, it don't go boom.Absolutely irrelevant. You can't put the safety on with the gun cocked. The safety will decock the gun.

The question wasn't "Which is safer, a loaded Glock or a loaded Beretta with the safety on" The question was "Which is safer, a loaded Glock, or a Beretta with the hammer cocked."

Come on folks, let's not allow our anti-Glock sentiments to drag us off topic. ;)
So how do you feel about cocked and locked Series 70 1911s? Only one failure to fire as in your above scenario.Are you saying the grip safety only blocks the sear? (Yeah, I guess that's right since they made a big deal of the S&W 1911 having a firing pin block on the grip safety.)

Well, I don't own any 1911 pistols so the question hasn't ever come up (for me, at least.)
There is no way I would carry my 92FS without the safety engaged. I think that's a bit extreme. I don't mind carrying it loaded with the safety off (no other choice for my 92G), but IMO the long stiff DA pull substitutes for a safety. Otherwise everyone would be up in arms about revolvers being unsafe...

For what it's worth, I own both Berettas and Glocks. I'm not at all anti-Beretta. In fact, I have a real soft spot for the Beretta 92 as it was my first semi-auto pistol, and only my second firearm.

IMO, this thread isn't about which one is better, it's about which one is safer UNDER ONE VERY SPECIFIC SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES. I think it's kind of sad that some people are so rabidly "My gun is best--every other gun licks dirt" that they can't even discuss relevant issues without making it into a major urination olympiad.

[voilsb]

IMO, this thread isn't about which one is better, it's about which one is safer UNDER ONE VERY SPECIFIC SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES. I think it's kind of sad that some people are so rabidly "My gun is best--every other gun licks dirt" that they can't even discuss relevant issues without making it into a major urination olympiad.Actually, as the author of the thread, I have to take contest with this. The thread wasn't really about which one was safer. As mentioned before, the use of Glock in the original post was simply because it was the first firearm of its type to come to mind, and it was an example.

The thread was not about which was better or which was safer. It was about how safe the Beretta 92 is while cocked and unlocked, and later moved to how safe a modified Beretta 92 is while cocked and locked.

Granted, threads tend to take a direction of their own after a few people get ahold of them, but that's the general intent of the thread.

The general idea I've gotten from the thread, though, is that the Beretta 92 is reasonably safe while uncocked with the manual safety disengaged, or cocked with the manual safety engaged (not an option with a stock Beretta 92), but not prudently safe cocked with the safety disengaged.

[XavierBreath]

Gentlemen, I have tried to read this thread and I have to say my head hurts. Who would carry a Beretta 92FS cocked and unlocked?

I'm going to go relax and shoot my 1911's.


mutter mutter mutter mutter mutter mutter mutter mutter mutter mutter mutter mutter mutter mutter mutter mutter mutter mutter mutter mutter mutter mutter mutter mutter mutter mutter mutter mutter

[RWK]

voilsb,

With respect, and as others have indicated, I believe this is a poor idea. I carry DA revolvers all the time, but I would not even consider carrying one cocked.

Be safe and best regards -- Roy

[355sigfan]

The Glock trigger safety prevents AD/NDs when only the side of the trigger is snagged. The trigger safety design also makes it unlikely that objects making initial light contact will fire trigger
END

The trigger safety is actually a drop safety that keeps the pistol from being fired when its dromed and the rear of the slide hits the ground. The safety keeps the weight of the trigger from allowing the gun to fire. I did not know this until I became a Glock Armorer.
Pat

[Drjones]

Frankly, you'd have to be stupid, crazy, or some combination thereof to carry the Beretta 9x series in such a manner.

[chaim]

I don't think you can find very many people who would suggest carrying an DA/SA (or SA only) pistol cocked and unlocked. Those few who would aren't going to be the one carrying your gun that way and putting themselves at both physical risk and risk of legal liability. I'd be willing to bet that none of those here who are saying that it might be ok would carry this way themselves.

In answer to the original question I'll simply reiterate some suggestions others have already made. If you really like the Beretta design you might want to consider relagating it to the range and getting a Taurus PT92 for carry. It is reliable, it has the Beretta's basic design and style (though the fit and finish isn't supposed to be quite as good), it is supposed to be accurate and it has a safety that allows cocked and locked if that is an option you want (and if you ever get used to the DA to SA transition you can carry it decocked or decocked and on safe). The other safe option if you can't get used to the DA/SA transition is to get an SA gun (or the DA/SA CZ with a SA style safety) and carry cocked and locked or get a DAO and carry with or without the external safety. If you don't like any of those options then you may wish to look around for a gunsmith who might convert your Beretta into an SA pistol.

[cool45auto]

Frankly, you'd have to be stupid, crazy, or some combination thereof to carry the Beretta 9x series in such a manner.

Come on, Dr Jones, its not any different then having to thumb off the safety on a 1911. ;)