Manual safetys on semi pistols - yes or no?

TestPilot said:

I had the displeasure to have met.

Click to expand...

I have NO doubt there was displeasure in those encounters.

There are a lot of highly regarded and highly qualified people participating here who "TestPilot" dares to criticize, and to date his stated qualifications are computer games.

I would love to know what other qualifications (certainly not English Gramnmar), if any, warrants his bold assessments of others with vast and definitive experience .

A certified law enforcement deadly force instructor who does not understand a very basic deadly force encounter problem. Not surprising, judging from some people agencies were willing to call "instructor " that I had the displeasure to have met.

Click to expand...

You sound like a classic mall ninja. What's your carry gun? A Glock 40 full auto with extended magazines?

Where do you get the idea that a safety should be put on and off based off of how you're holding the gun? If it's out of the holster, the safety should be OFF.

testpilot said:

Trigger is not what inhbits fire. On SAO or striker guns, it is the sear that inhibits fire.

Click to expand...

LMAO!

You may find it interesting to drop the video games for a while and try to learn a little about what you're babbling about.

So the sear is what inhibits firing according to you?

A 1911 thumb safety works by blocking the sear. It's the red thing blocking the sear in the pic below. By your definition above, a 1911 thumb safety DOES NOT inhibit fire, it's the sear that's preventing the gun from firing. So the sear is actually the "manual firing inhibitor".

Are you going to start calling the thumb safety the "blocking device of the manual firing inhibitor thumb lever"?

Original question: "Manual safetys on semi pistols - yes or no?"

No.

Manual safeties for modern pistols are like 3-gear manual automotive transmissions in an 8-gear computer controlled automotive transmission World. They are nothing more than charming anachronisms fun to play with but a potential hinderance to flawless high performance.

^^^

Now THAT'S funny!

Nom de Forum said:

Manual safeties for modern pistols are like 3-gear manual automotive transmissions in an 8-gear computer controlled automotive transmission World. They are nothing more than charming anachronisms fun to play with but a hinderance to flawless high performance.

Click to expand...

This thread is bringing out all sorts.

I think I'm quite done with this silliness.

This thread is bringing out all sorts.

I think I'm quite done with this silliness.

Click to expand...

C'mon now - embrace the humor. There's a wealth of it here.

Take TestPilot (TP) for example.

When I read much of his stuff I inevitably get this mental image of Yoda speaking.

"Engaging the thumb lever type manual firing inhibitor you are. Becoming safe your firearm is. Yes."

How can you not enjoy that kind of stuff?

meef said:

C'mon now - embrace the humor. There's a wealth of it here.

Take TestPilot (TP) for example.

When I read much of his stuff I inevitably get this mental image of Yoda speaking.

"Engaging the thumb lever type manual firing inhibitor you are. Becoming safe your firearm is. Yes."

How can you not enjoy that kind of stuff?

Click to expand...

^^^

A 1911 thumb safety works by blocking the sear. It's the red thing blocking the sear in the pic below. By your definition above, a 1911 thumb safety DOES NOT inhibit fire, it's the sear that's preventing the gun from firing. ...

Click to expand...

Trigger fires the gun by actuating the sear which releases the cocked hammer or striker.

Engaged manual firing inhibitor thumb lever device inhibits that from happening even if user intends to fire.

Nice try though.

In all honesty this does nothing to help the video gaming crowd. he is doing nothing but playing into the sterotypes of the classic mall ninja video game guy who tries too hard and know way too little

Way-ullll ... since "Test Pilot" calls me out

A certified law enforcement deadly force instructor who does not understand a very basic deadly force encounter problem.

Click to expand...

I shall have to say that it is he who does not understand a "very basic deadly force encounter problem." One responds to a lethal force situation -- or a situation which one believes to be a lethal force situation -- with lethal force. That is the basic fact of a deadly force encounter. Unlike video games -- that can be paused or otherwise shutdown -- in real life, there aren't any do-overs. I well understand deadly force concepts, "Test Pilot," but at least I can say that my experience was gained in the military and on patrol, rather than by reading anything Gabe Suarez has to say or through playing children's games.

Anyway, my comments in the post that "Test Pilot" took issue with was simply my way of trying to say that his remarkably convoluted linguistic manglings rendered any possible hint of a message incomprehensible.

However, I agree this thread's been quite entertaining ...

LMAO! This is a great holiday thread, almost as humerous as the old Gecko45 (the original mall ninja) postings.

testpilot said:

On SAO or striker guns, it is the sear that inhibits fire.

Click to expand...

testpilot said:

Trigger fires the gun by actuating the sear which releases the cocked hammer or striker.

Engaged manual firing inhibitor thumb lever device inhibits that from happening even if user intends to fire.

Click to expand...

So what you're trying to say is that the manual firing inhibitor thumb lever device inhibits the inhibitor device from being actuated by the manual firing inhibitor finger lever device?

Maybe you could add your wisdom to the wisdom of Gecko45 located here:

http://lonelymachines.org/mall-ninjas/

You guys would get along great together!

Nom de Forum wrote,
Manual safeties for modern pistols are like 3-gear manual automotive transmissions in an 8-gear computer controlled automotive transmission World. They are nothing more than charming anachronisms fun to play with but a hinderance to flawless high performance.

Click to expand...

That's right, because none of the top competition shooters are using single action 1911's, CZ's, Tanfoglio's, or SIG's.

non de forum said:

Manual safeties for modern pistols are like 3-gear manual automotive transmissions in an 8-gear computer controlled automotive transmission World. They are nothing more than charming anachronisms fun to play with but a hinderance to flawless high performance.

Click to expand...

That really is pretty funny. You ought to go out to a pistol competition or Recon Marine training to see some high performance shooting. Pay attention to what everyone is using and what wins (hint: 1911 ....).

There's a reason SIG is building competition 1911's - they like winning!

http://www.sigsauer.com/CatalogProductDetails/1911-max.aspx

http://www.ammoland.com/2013/10/max-michel-wins-seventh-uspsa-national-championship/#axzz2nwwqGEsy

JTQ said:

That's right, because none of the top competition shooters are using single action 1911's, CZ's, Tanfoglio's, or SIG's.

Click to expand...

Your statement is a classic error in logic.

Ah, c'mon now guys, quit trying to inject reality into this thread! Whoops, missed "Nom de forum's" latest ... Nope, not an error in logic; statements totally appropriate to the topic at hand ...

(I am still cracking up, though, when I re-read: "...warranted a firing process being started ...")

"Your statement is a classic error in logic." <--- (word collection with no actual meaning or purpose)

So what you're trying to say is that the manual firing inhibitor thumb lever device inhibits the inhibitor device from being actuated by the manual firing inhibitor finger lever device?

Click to expand...

Sear holds the cocked hammer or striker from striking the primer.

Trigger force the sear to release the held hammer or striker.

Manual firing inhibitor, when engaged, inhibits that from happening.

It is not a hard concept to understand. Well, may be it is hard when your ego rejects the facts.

Nom de Forum wrote,
Manual safeties for modern pistols are like 3-gear manual automotive transmissions in an 8-gear computer controlled automotive transmission World. They are nothing more than charming anachronisms fun to play with but a hinderance to flawless high performance.

Click to expand...

This is more of a revolver to semi auto comparison. Either way, I'm happy driving my manual all day long since I'm not doing high performance stuff.

So test pilot, what do you carry and how long have you been carrying?

45_auto said:

That really is pretty funny. You ought to go out to a pistol competition or Recon Marine training to see some high performance shooting. Pay attention to what everyone is using and what wins (hint: 1911 ....).

There's a reason SIG is building competition 1911's - they like winning!

http://www.sigsauer.com/CatalogProductDetails/1911-max.aspx

http://www.ammoland.com/2013/10/max-michel-wins-seventh-uspsa-national-championship/#axzz2nwwqGEsy

Click to expand...

I am always happy to give without effort or fault someone the benefit of a laugh.

It has been I while since I went to a pistol competition, but I started when nobody outside of Arizona knew the names Latham and Enos. Shot right next to them every Thursday night and on Sunday once a month. I managed to work-up to A Class with both 1911 and revolver.

Here is some astounding news for you: If you removed the manual thumb safeties off of all the guns you mentioned, competitors would still be winning with them and doing it without negligent discharges. The manual safeties do not contribute to flawless high performance. BTW guys with Glocks have numerous times defeated guys using guns with manual safeties.

Manual safeties always have the potential for hindering flawless high performance. Maybe you have not been to enough competitions to see the rare disaster of a competitor fumble releasing one. Embarrassing in competition but possibly fatal in a gun fight.

I have seen top competitors make equipment errors due to stress. The rest of us mere mortals under conditions of life and death are even more prone to these errors. Why would you want to have an unnecessary piece of equipment that increases the possibility of making an error?

After all the hype starting with JC forty years ago, the 1911 is popular as much for being a totem, fetish, etc. as it is for performance.

Recon Marine? I'll bet that choice was made using more than performance criteria. It wouldn't surprise me if they readopted the BAR out of nostalgia.

Sig? A decision to make money was made and winning has little to do with that decision.

Thanks for the laugh!

meef said:

"Your statement is a classic error in logic." <--- (word collection with no actual meaning or purpose)

Click to expand...

Only to someone who has not studied logic. See post above for a clue.

Only to someone who has not studied logic. See post above for a clue.

Click to expand...

Sorry Grasshopper, my bad.

I was absent for that class.

Out mastering pebble-snatching instead.

So test pilot, what do you carry and how long have you been carrying?

Click to expand...

I sincerely hope whatever you wish to do with my answer is constructive.

SIG Sauer P229R DAK for about a year.

Glock 22 for about 5 years.

M&P for the past few months or so.

However, I have been shooting them longer than I carried them.

The above does not include backup guns. I also excluded M9 which I carried in the military, since it was not my choice.

My current choice is M&P40, without the firing inhibitor thumb switch.

The manual safeties do not contribute to flawless high performance.

Click to expand...

Nor have manual safeties been proven a detractor to flawless high performance. Your point?

BTW guys with Glocks have numerous times defeated guys using guns with manual safeties.

Click to expand...

And guys (girls, too) with Glocks have numerous times been defeated by guys (girls, too) using guns with manual safeties. Your point?

Manual safeties always have the potential for hindering flawless high performance

Click to expand...

Statistics on just often this occurs? Can we prove that someone who errs in competition -- or on the street -- would have performed flawlessly if using a gun without a manual safety? I submit that the root problem is training and practice, not equipment.

And Guns without manual safeties have the potential -- there are statistics to back this up -- for increased instances of negligent discharge.

Why would you want to have an unnecessary piece of equipment that increases the possibility of making an error?

Click to expand...

Sigh. You haven't been paying attention, lo these past decades, have you? Features on firearms aren't always there because that's what the end-user desires, requires or actually needs. Law enforcement bean-counters, risk management specialists, insurance companies, extremely stupid elected officials (see U.S. Congress and the legislative bodies in states such as California, Massachusetts, New York, Illinois, Colorado, et al) and in particular, those litigators who spawn like vermin, have all conspired to bring us collectively to this point.

And while we all wish we were such master gunfighters in the mold of Gabe Suarez, Rob Pincus, "Test Pilot" and others (sorry, too numerous to mention), most of us probably SHOULD be carrying handguns with manual safety devices. If you are one of the high-speed guys that doesn't feel you need a safety on your pistol, more power to you.

(By the way, my employer gave me a couple S&W M&Ps -- without safeties. We used to issue pistols with decocking safeties, but alas the increase in NDs and the decrease in budget funds still sees us with our polymer perfection ...)