An interesting story at the doctors office

[Vern Humphrey]

I have heard (or read) dozens of comments that somehow a safety "slows you down."

I don't see how. As my M1911 clears leather, my thumbs are locked over the safety lever, and it comes off as the gun is coming on target. There is plenty of time to take the safety off with a proper grip.

To me, this is kind of like claiming that a trigger "slows you down" and you "might forget" to pull it.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by Vern Humphrey:

I have heard (or read) dozens of comments that somehow a safety "slows you down."

I don't see how. As my M1911 clears leather, my thumbs are locked over the safety lever, and it comes off as the gun is coming on target. There is plenty of time to take the safety off with a proper grip.

To me, this is kind of like claiming that a trigger "slows you down" and you "might forget" to pull it.

Depends, I think, on the design of the gun.

The safety on a Luger or a Colt Pocket Model would slow me down quite a bit.

The safety on a Browning HP does slow me down.

I do not think that the safety on my STI Guardian slows me down.

But for a long time I carried a Ruger SR9c. The safety operates generally the same way as the one on the 1911. But it is not the same.

One time, in training, my thumb failed to disengage the safety on the draw. I do not know why. I found that out only when I tried to pull the trigger. The delay could have been disastrous.

The instructor told me to leave the safety disengaged for the rest of the two day class.

I ended up switching to a striker fired pistol with a grip safety.

No Glocks for me.

 

[Shaq]

I think you're misinterpreting some people's posts. They aren't "blaming the gun," they're pointing out that some guns require special precautions. In the case of the Glock, for example, getting anything (say, a fold of your sweat shirt) into the holster along with the gun can result in an ND.

Well said. And exactly what many are missing.

 

[Warp]

I think 200 repetitions ingraining the movement is a big optimistic, but for such a well placed and easy to disengage safety, the primary safety concern would seem to be forgetting to re-engage it. Talk about a risk of unintended discharge when re-holstering, do it with a short crisp light single action with safety off.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by Warp:

for such a well placed and easy to disengage safety, the primary safety concern would seem to be forgetting to re-engage it. Talk about a risk of unintended discharge when re-holstering, do it with a short crisp light single action with safety off.

Valid point.

 

[Skribs]

Vern, if you're well trained and have the muscle memory for it, a safety won't slow you down. If you rarely practice with it, or if you swap around between weapons that have different safeties (i.e. frame-mounted, slide-mounted, and then the aberration that is the 5-7) you may not want it.

The Glock and M&P are unique in that they're single-action semi-automatic pistols without ANYTHING preventing accidental trigger actuation.

As has been said before, there are plenty of striker-fired pistols that copy the Glock and M&P that don't have a manual safety. There are also plenty of light-double-action pistols like HKs and Sigs that have no manual safety.

Even if you are looking at double action pistols or DA/SA pistols carried hammer down, safety off, there is nothing preventing the gun from going off other than the longer trigger pull. It becomes less likely (just like a grip safety or trigger safety makes it less likely you will have an inadvertent discharge), but it is still a possibility.

Kleanbore is exactly right in his analysis. It becomes a question of ease-of-use vs. safety. Personally I'd rather take the time and pay attention to the safety (which I would have to anyway) and have the "I need to use it now" require less thought, subconscious or otherwise.

No matter what you have to pay attention to safety.

 

[MislMan]

What I'd like to know, how does a .40 cal anything discharge in your pants pocket and you claim you don't know what that sound was? That load a bang and recoil coming from your front pocket has got to tell you something. Didn't know you were shot until your girlfriend saw your foot was bleeding. I don't think so. A negligent discharged? Perhaps, but you have to wonder about this story.

 

[Warp]

What I'd like to know, how does a .40 cal anything discharge in your pants pocket and you claim you don't know what that sound was? That load a bang and recoil coming from your front pocket has got to tell you something. Didn't know you were shot until your girlfriend saw your foot was bleeding. I don't think so. A negligent discharged? Perhaps, but you have to wonder about this story.

I don't know...but sometimes the way you body and mind react you don't really feel anything right away. I cut my foot once, nice little v-shaped flap of tissue sliced up (not all the way off thankfully), to the tune of 13 stitches. I barely felt a thing, wouldn't have even thought of it as a light toe-stub, except for what I saw. Didn't feel a thing, really, until it started swelling after the fact (doc used a -caine so I didn't even feel him going to town cleaning it out).

Granted that's not the same as a GSW but that combined with what I've seen or heard other people say...I think it's plausible.

 

[Jesse H]

Okay, what IS it you have to do to make a Glock fire, other than depressing the "plastic hinge" and continuing to put pressure on the trigger?

Everybody knows Glocks don't have manual safeties to disengage. With that said, Wardenwolf, with no understanding of Glocks, believes that Glocks are dangerous due to a lack of a mechanical safety. I'm not sure if he understands a Glock with a round chambered isn't the same as a 1911 with a round chambered, hammer back, safety off.

For the record, I'm not one to believe a Glock is faster from a holster due to it not having a manual safety. Also, I don't find Glocks, or other striker fired pistols without manual safeties to be more dangerous because I train with them.

It all boils down to the user and training.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

The point is, Glocks, because of their trigger-mounted safeties are more likely to be involved in an ND. As I pointed out, Glock NDs have resulted from people inadvertently holstering a bit of cloth, involving the trigger with the seat belt latch and so on.

 

[Kleanbore]

Posted by Jesse H:

It all boils down to the user and training.

Well, that's a lot of it, but that's not all of it, by any means.

Users, however well trained, can err, particularly under stress.

That's why system engineers include the interactions of operators in failure mode and effect analyses.

A failure mode and effect analysis can be performed during requirements definition; during the design phase; and in the case of a commercial off the shelf item such as a defensive handgun, in product selection.

Should someone performing such an analysis fail to take into account the failure mode mentioned by Vern in Post #85, that someone should rely upon someone else's work.

Vern's point is precisely why I do not carry a Glock.

 

[Uncle Nubbs]

Forgive me for not reading through to the end but this is devolving quickly. I see a lot of people arguing over the mechanics of various platforms. Glocks. 1911 et al. This is steadily drifting away from the point. Stay safe and think!!!!! Gosh darn it, these are tools and we can argue all day long about the inherent danger in any of them. No one is any better than any other if you want to disregard basic safekeeping. Apologies in advance but this seems like it started out as an interesting thread which went sideways.

 

[PowerG]

I've read several articles about large LE agencies transitioning to no-safety striker-fired pistols and their ND rate increasing alarmingly. Ideally it shouldn't matter, yet in the real world it always does. I also prefer other designs.

 

[Warp]

I've read several articles about large LE agencies transitioning to no-safety striker-fired pistols and their ND rate increasing alarmingly. Ideally it shouldn't matter, yet in the real world it always does. I also prefer other designs.

Do you have any links to these articles you might share?

 

[PowerG]

http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-sheriff-guns-20150614-story.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/local/longterm/dcpolice/deadlyforce/police4page1.htm

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-owens-glock-accidents-20150508-story.html

 

[Jesse H]

Well, that's a lot of it, but that's not all of it, by any means.

Users, however well trained, can err, particularly under stress.

Understandable. My teammates and myself make mistakes when we train. That's why we train. But that's why we also have absolutes.

Shootings are stressful situations, we always try to draw and get accurate rounds on target as quickly as we can. We never train to re-holster quickly.

From the above linked article,

One sheriff's deputy shot himself in the leg while pulling out his gun to confront a suspect.

Another accidentally fired a bullet in a restroom stall. A third deputy stumbled over a stroller in a closet as he was searching for a suspect, squeezing off a round that went through a wall and lodged in a piece of furniture in the next room.

Again, training. I don't care if you've got a 20lb trigger on a revolver or BHP with a safety. Proper training still teaches you to index until you're on target. We're all supposed gun guys here, we all know this.

 

[PowerG]

Understandable. My teammates and myself make mistakes when we train. That's why we train. But that's why we also have absolutes.

Shootings are stressful situations, we always try to draw and get accurate rounds on target as quickly as we can. We never train to re-holster quickly.

From the above linked article,



Again, training. I don't care if you've got a 20lb trigger on a revolver or BHP with a safety. Proper training still teaches you to index until you're on target. We're all supposed gun guys here, we all know this.

I agree, we're all gun guys...but many people in law enforcement and the military aren't.

 

[ljnowell]

This is complete garbage. There has never been one case of an XD failing to fire because of the grip safety. If grip safeties were dangerous, why are they still on 1911's after a hundred years of use?



I think that Glock fanboys should remove the seat belts, airbags and every other safety feature on their cars because they are all points of failure that could cause an accident.

Really? You know that for a fact? Never once? You keep stats and have talked to EVERY owner??

It's real easy to turn the "fanboy" table and simply dismiss your post as a "XD fanboy." Let's not start that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ljnowell]

And when you remove the presence of a grip safety you introduce a point of failure in re-holstering which has been proven to be a common risk associated with striker fired pistols. You re-holster thousands of times but most of us will hopefully go our entire lives without needing to use our pistol in self defense mode. What are the chances you are going to grip the pistol incorrectly that one time you need it? If you have trained properly I am guessing not much chance of that happening.



I can make a sound argument for manual safeties and against them, I can make a sound argument for and against magazine disconnect safeties, I can make a sound argument for and against grip safeties, I can make a sound argument for and against a duty pistol vs hooker gun, double stack vs single stack, small caliber vs large caliber and on and on. What we have proven in this thread (and many others that devolve into fanboyism) is carrying a concealed weapon, any concealed weapon, is a great big bundle of compromise and there is no one size fits all answer and there is no "best pistol ever designed" and you should quickly turn a deaf ear to anyone who tries to argue otherwise.

I have to absolutely agree with you. Anyone that argues a Glock, 1911, XD, m&p, etc., is junk or even worse, responsible for user negligence is someone who shouldn't even have their opinion considered. They have already shown they are biased and closed minded. Not to mention, blaming a gun for a users shortcomings is exactly what the "other side" does in their attempt to disarm us.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Skribs]

I have a couple of follow-up questions for this thread:

1) PowerG, I wonder what happens when departments go from Glock-type weapons to 1911-type weapons? Are their negligent discharges from people who forget about the safety? Or are there situations which they forget the safety is on and that costs them precious seconds?

I remember reading stories about LEOs who will never practice with their weapon unless it's time to qualify. If these LEOs are issued a new weapon, they will likely not train enough to overcome their habits form the old one.

2) If you have a ND while the gun is in your pocket, do you not feel heat and shockwave from the muzzle blast against your leg? Do you not feel the gun shifting around as the slide at least tries to move around? The recoil of a .40 in a pocketable Glock isn't going to be negligible.

I actively take steps to avoid having NDs, and I don't want people to try and test this out, but it seems to me you would know it went off.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

Just making small talk I asked "How long do you have the boot for?" I don't know if he didn't understand the question, or didn't hear me, but he answered by telling me HOW he got the boot.

I'm guessing a combination of regional dialect and short term hearing loss due to shooting his foot with his gun.

 

[Old Dog]

PowerG says

"I agree, we're all gun guys...but many people in law enforcement and the military aren't."

Well, ya know ... they're the guys putting it on the line every day, not just every once in a blue moon ... Y'all can sit around all day long patting yourselves on the back about how much you know about guns and such, but the fact remains, some are out there every day ...

I remember reading stories about LEOs who will never practice with their weapon unless it's time to qualify. If these LEOs are issued a new weapon, they will likely not train enough to overcome their habits form the old one.

Love the anecdotal stories ... "I know a guy who knew a guy ..." I'm sort getting tired about those folks not in law enforcement that presume to know anything about current law enforcement firearms training.

 

[RetiredUSNChief]

I think 200 repetitions ingraining the movement is a big optimistic, but for such a well placed and easy to disengage safety, the primary safety concern would seem to be forgetting to re-engage it. Talk about a risk of unintended discharge when re-holstering, do it with a short crisp light single action with safety off.

Firearms safety is a holistic approach. And interestingly, a "safety" isn't part of the Four Rules, manual or otherwise.

One may certainly use a safety to increase one's safety posture...but one is insanely stupid to rely upon a mechanical safety, manually operated or not, as a sole means of providing safety. Or even a major means of safety.

Firearms safety is first and foremost embodied in the handling of the firearm, and that's clearly what the Four Rules are all about:

1. All guns are always loaded.
2. Never let the muzzle cover anything you're not willing to destroy.
3. Keep your finger off the trigger until you're sure of the target.
4. Be sure of your target.


Yes...a manual safety CAN increase one's safety posture...but interestingly, it also relies solely upon the person HANDLING the firearm to utilize it properly in the first place.

Hence your comment about the consequences of "forgetting to re-engage it".

 

[Shaq]

I have heard (or read) dozens of comments that somehow a safety "slows you down."

I don't see how. As my M1911 clears leather, my thumbs are locked over the safety lever, and it comes off as the gun is coming on target. There is plenty of time to take the safety off with a proper grip.

To me, this is kind of like claiming that a trigger "slows you down" and you "might forget" to pull it.

A well-designed thumb safety (like on a 1911) may not slow you down, but a grip safety on some 1911's can - depending on how easily it moves. I had a S&W 1911 that would not fire unless I moved the thumb of the firing hand down. Even with the thumb down, the grip safety spring would not allow the gun to fire unless I exerted lots of effort, squeezing the grip to depress it. Accurate shooting was impossible. I imagine the problem was caused by the firing pin safety operating off of the grip safety. I had no such problem after trading the gun for a Wilson - which didn't have a FP safety & had a well-designed grip safety spring. I'm always able to fire it with a thumb up or thumb down.

 

[Skribs]

Love the anecdotal stories ... "I know a guy who knew a guy ..." I'm sort getting tired about those folks not in law enforcement that presume to know anything about current law enforcement firearms training.

I don't "know a guy who". I read a bunch of stories here from LEOs talking about the non-gun guys in their department and how often they practice.

It may be different now, or in different places, but my understanding is that most non-SWAT officers get enough training to do the job, but aren't really required to keep up the training past minimum qualifications. I've also heard this in other areas (i.e. martial arts training for police officers).

I am not a LEO, so I don't know for sure, but my experience with the government suggests this isn't far off from the truth.