Striker fired versus DA/SA, advantage?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Here is the link to the report from the Office of the Inspector General of the Los Angeles County Sheriff about what happened and why when the issue handgun changed from the DA/SA Beretta 92F to the striker-fired S&W M&P. Like many problems, more than one root cause was found. The initial transition training was also found to be deficient.

The report was very well researched and is a very good read.

https://oig.lacounty.gov/Portals/OIG/Reports/Unintended Discharge Report.pdf

Some of the conclusions:

In this report, we first describe the frequency of the unintended discharges and how rapidly the problem emerged after introduction of the new handgun. We found there was a moderate increase in unintended discharges in non-tactical settings but that there was a six-fold increase in unintended discharges in tactical settings – that is while doing police work in the field – from 2012, before the introduction of the M&P, to 2014. Second, we review the actual incidents of unintended discharge and evaluate the possible causes of these incidents. We found that several factors apparently contributed to the significant increase. The first is that the lack of an external safety lever on the M&P coupled with inattention has led to unintended discharges in locker rooms, bathrooms and other locations. The second factor appears to be that some deputies are violating basic firearms safety rules by failing to follow the admonition to keep the index finger off the trigger until the user makes the conscious decision to fire the weapon. The new handgun is more sensitive in some ways than the Beretta and unintended discharges have risen as a result. Finally, weapon-light activation errors have led to a significant number of deputies reporting that they unintentionally pulled the trigger of their weapon when they intended only to turn on the light.
Click to expand...
 
And over here I am just wanting a RAMI...:(


I like DA/SA with decocker, all my favorite pistols are that platform. Two of my 3 CC are striker fired. Hopefully the RAMI will change that.
 
Hate to burst your bubble, but safety with ANY firearm resides between the ears; it has nothing to do with the trigger mechanism. 'Off target, off trigger'. If you can't/won't follow that rule please do us all a favor and leave handgun ownership to others.
Click to expand...

There we go - that is what I was referring to. This always pops up on these threads - I was just waiting.

No way can some people acknowledge that ANY of the above could be true. It's always the person's fault, and the people who are concerned about this shouldn't even own a firearm, according to some....
 
Shipwreck said:
There we go - that is what I was referring to. This always pops up on these threads - I was just waiting.

No way can some people acknowledge that ANY of the above could be true. It's always the person's fault, and the people who are concerned about this shouldn't even own a firearm, according to some....
Click to expand...
I also have never understood this rationale either.
I don't know why it is so hard to believe that some gun owners might prefer an extra measure of safety for being imperfect humans.

I also never understood the whole paradox of "it's a training thing" and "no manual safeties...EVER!"
It doesn't make sense to me that someone will conclude that they can be 100% perfect and safe handling a firearm without a manual safety in a do or die situation, yet they do not think they can train themselves to swipe off a safety with muscle memory.

I don't want to start a fight here. I have carried a striker fired gun without a manual safety. However my work requires me to unholster and store my pistol up to several times a day. I am a firm believer in keeping a striker pistol without a manual safety in a holster unless it is use. I'm not scared of it "going off" by itself, but I want to minimize the chance of a ND that could injure myself or others. That's what responsible gun owners do.

For my needs, a hammer fired da/sa is preferred first, followed by a striker with a manual safety, followed by a striker w/o manual safety and a good holster. Just personal preference. I don't worry about what others have decided to carry as long as they do it safely.
 
Deanimator: "The HUGE advantage of a Glock type striker fired gun is the consistent trigger pull. The trigger pulls on my Glocks are the same from first through last shots."

I hear this all the time. Do you not have a trigger reset? Is this not a different pull than your first shot? My DA/SA have a trigger reset too. My first pull is just longer. This mantra has always bugged me. Again, as stated.....I enjoy all trigger systems and don't necessarily advocate one over another.
 
Of my pistols, only one is striker fired. It has a long creep in the SA pull before firing a shot. It also has a DA pull, but only as a second strike. It would be great if it had a decocker, making it a true DA/SA striker fired gun, to be more in line with my hammer fired guns. Despite the long creep in SA fire, I still use the external manual safety.
This is all with my Taurus 709 Slim.

My current CC pistol is a DOA Kel Tec P-11, which has a very heavy trigger pull each and every shot. No external safety, no decocker, nothing to engage or disengage, nothing to snag on the draw. Yes, it's a ridiculously long and heavy trigger, but I know I'm shooting it, and am very deliberate about it.

My other pistols are DA/SA, one of which has a bobbed hammer so it has to be a DA first shot.

It's a compromise between fast, accurate, consistent versus safe. Not that Glocks, M&P's and other striker fired guns are unsafe, I think it's psychological. But, I have heard more about ND's with modern striker fired pistols than I have older DA/SA pistols.
 
Fiv3r wrote,
I also never understood the whole paradox of "it's a training thing" and "no manual safeties...EVER!"
It doesn't make sense to me that someone will conclude that they can be 100% perfect and safe handling a firearm without a manual safety in a do or die situation, yet they do not think they can train themselves to swipe off a safety with muscle memory.
Click to expand...
I agree this always intrigues me in these discussions.
 
Thanks for all of your replies, they are appreciated. Please remember though, that we are all human and by definition unique. What works for some may not work for others; and having to use a weapon when actually being fired upon is NOT the same as training, I don't care how you train. When you hear a real bullet go by your ear, it ain't the same! Some men may react the same as their training, some may not. As shown in some of the studies referenced here, what you intend to do may not be the same as what you really do when under stress.

My intent with the question was to learn a little more about the advantages of DA/SA pistols versus other types of mechanisms. And that I have, thank you.
 
I also never understood the whole paradox of "it's a training thing" and "no manual safeties...EVER!"
Click to expand...


+1

There are a lot of people who get paid to shoot really fast.. Many do so with DA/SA guns, Safties, etc. etc.

Everything a Tactical Timmy will claim will get em killed in real life... LOL
 
Shootshellz said:
Hate to burst your bubble, but safety with ANY firearm resides between the ears; it has nothing to do with the trigger mechanism. 'Off target, off trigger'. If you can't/won't follow that rule please do us all a favor and leave handgun ownership to others.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, there are some studies (the one I referenced earlier) and this one:

http://www.shastadefense.com/1911streetsafe.pdf

That indicate that regardless of training and having "keep your finger off the trigger" ingrained, it may still be a subconscious response due to stress. In this article the results were 632 out of 674 (94%) officers tested during FATs training periodically placed their fingers inside the trigger guard, while having no intention of shooting.

Chuck
 
Chuck R. said:
In this article the results were 632 out of 674 (94%) officers tested during FATs training periodically placed their fingers inside the trigger guard, while having no intention of shooting.
Click to expand...

Please do not let reality intrude upon your posts. After all, this IS the internet.

Everyone knows that all posters on THR, even the ones who have never had any training and shoot maybe 100 rounds per year, are MUCH more proficient with their weapons than any police officer could ever hope to be.
 
MAKster said:
I think a real world example of the safety benefit of the heavy first DA/SA trigger pull vs. a lighter striker pistol is the LA County Sheriffs Dept. They recently switched from the Beretta 92FS to the Smith & Wesson M&P and there has been a dramatic increase in negligent discharges. Clearly the heavy first trigger pull was covering up bad habits like putting your finger on the trigger.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/12/16/us/los-angeles-sheriffs-department-guns-report/
Click to expand...
When you have poor training and judgment, it's always easier to blame the gun...
 
guyfromohio said:
Deanimator: "The HUGE advantage of a Glock type striker fired gun is the consistent trigger pull. The trigger pulls on my Glocks are the same from first through last shots."

I hear this all the time. Do you not have a trigger reset? Is this not a different pull than your first shot? My DA/SA have a trigger reset too. My first pull is just longer. This mantra has always bugged me. Again, as stated.....I enjoy all trigger systems and don't necessarily advocate one over another.
Click to expand...
NO, the trigger reset is NOT "different"... certainly no more different than on my High Standard Citation.

The DA pull is DIFFERENT from the SA pull.

If you like it, use it. I don't, and won't.
 
Originally Posted by guyfromohio
Deanimator: "The HUGE advantage of a Glock type striker fired gun is the consistent trigger pull. The trigger pulls on my Glocks are the same from first through last shots."

I hear this all the time. Do you not have a trigger reset? Is this not a different pull than your first shot? My DA/SA have a trigger reset too. My first pull is just longer. This mantra has always bugged me. Again, as stated.....I enjoy all trigger systems and don't necessarily advocate one over another.
Click to expand...
NO, the trigger reset is NOT "different"... certainly no more different than on my High Standard Citation.
Click to expand...

I believe he is referring to "riding the reset". Thus eliminating the take up.
 
Chuck R. said:
That indicate that regardless of training and having "keep your finger off the trigger" ingrained, it may still be a subconscious response due to stress. In this article the results were 632 out of 674 (94%) officers tested during FATs training periodically placed their fingers inside the trigger guard, while having no intention of shooting.
Click to expand...

That might suggest that the main reason we haven't heard more about a LOT of ND's with SA guns is that, simply, SA guns haven't been as widely used by LEO and military units as have Glocks.

SA 1911s did get used a lot in WWII, but the biggest horror stories about those guns wasn't from unintended discharges during the stress of battle, but when poorly trained individuals handled the guns in peace time. (The military also didn't typically allow troops to carry their weapons cocked & locked during peace time or when not in a live-fire area.) Then too, the nature of "battle" in the LEO world is sometimes less clear than with a soldier is doing combat...

That might also explain why some agencies and maybe foreign militaries wanted and got safety-equipped Glocks. The problem with that solution s that the safety would be likely be released when the weapon was drawn (as is the case with SA weapons), and the earlier articles about "startle" responses would suggest that the safety wouldn't do much to offset that physiological reaction and ND's.

In the final analysis, I don't see how a striker-fired gun (at least most of them) is really all that different from a SA gun once either one of them are out of the holster and you're in a stressful situation.

.
 
Shipwreck said:
...... But, the issue isn't simply ONLY a matter of "training" - as that is the viewpoint that gets tossed around a lot.And there is no reason to degrade people who prefer DA/SA and treat them as if they are dummies who can't use a gun responsibly
Click to expand...

Again, well stated, Shipwreck. This topic, here and on other forums, routinely has the point completely missed by many posters.
Case in point:


When you have poor training and judgment, it's always easier to blame the gun...
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter WHY pistol designs like the Glocks are resulting in more AD's, the simple fact is that the design itself IS more prone to them. That isn't necessarilly a criticism of them, nor does in absolve the shooter that caused it. But it is a simple, demonstrable fact that the design is inherently riskier.
Why this distinction is so difficult to grasp everytime this discussion re-emerges, is baffling.
 
tarosean said:
I believe he is referring to "riding the reset". Thus eliminating the take up.
Click to expand...
Yes he is.

This started as a really good discussion.
But I can feel the bunching up of knickers on some of these posters.

Of course ND and AD's are caused by the shooter. The safety "between the ears" failed. But for some of us DA/SA guys the DA is an extra measure because we accept that we are not perfect and can make mistakes.

OP wanted to know the 'pro' side of DA/SA. Lets get back to that.

1. You have to fully commit to the first shot. For some this means less ND's. Or for me I get the warm and fuzzies.
2. The SA on a DA/SA is usually very easy to use. 4 lb trigger pulls and generally short resets.
3. Safeties are not required to carry with a round in the chamber (de-cocked of course).

For me Striker fired pistols represent efficiency.
They are smaller, lighter, etc than their DA/SA counterparts. Mostly because they do not need the space a hammer mechanism requires.

And for that, they are great choices.
 
Yes, back to the original question. I think a DA/SA has the following advantages;

The longer, stiffer DA trigger pull is less likely to contribute to a negligent discharge.

The ability to place my thumb on the decocked hammer as I reholster is reassuring. Because we have a fair number of gun free zones around here I am frequently reholstering blind while seated in my truck. Reassurance is a good thing.

A DA hammer fired action allows for a second strike in case of a light primer strike.

As for the DA/SA transition encouraging a premature discharge on a follow up shot, if I shoot you once I will probably shoot you twice. Having that second shot break a microsecond too soon is probably not a big deal. After shot number one I am shooting from reset anyway so it's no different than my striker fired pistols.

Thanks to the OP for starting the thread.
 
Last edited:
You are welcome. I've been a shooter for 40+ years, but still have many questions and desire to learn. I've had a couple of Glocks and currently have a Sig for HD and carry a S&W Shield (although I may be rethinking that!). This discussion brings up another question, which I'll ask in a separate post.

Q
 
Corpral_Agarn said:
For me Striker fired pistols represent efficiency.
They are smaller, lighter, etc than their DA/SA counterparts. Mostly because they do not need the space a hammer mechanism requires.
Click to expand...

I was comparing some different pistols a while back and came to a different conclusion. I noticed that the striker fired pistols had more mass and slide from the breach face to the rear of the slide than the hammer fired pistols. They had a little more sight radius too, which is always good. I think to compare weight, one would have to look at examples of comparable materials and technology. Admittedly I was only looking at a few examples vs. an exhaustive study.

This has been a good thread with some well thought out points.
 
While controversial, I don't like the trigger on Glocks. It is too mushy for my preferences. That said, I have not fired any other striker fired pistols so some may have better triggers.
 
To me, one of the advantages of a hammer-fired pistol (could be DA/SA or DAO) with an external hammer is that the hammer movement can be monitored during holstering. With a striker-fired gun like the Glock, trigger movement during holstering, say from a trapped cover garment, is very hard to detect. With a hammer-fired gun with an exposed hammer, that trigger motion is very easy to feel. As such, one can train to monitor the hammer when holstering and increase the margins of user safety.

There have been some attempts to improve the ability to sense something snagging the trigger, including strikers that protrude from the rear of the slide and "the Gadget" for Glock pistols. Those both work on the same concept of monitoring motion during the holstering process.
 
I carry AIWB.

I won't carry a striker fired gun that way unless it has a thumb safety. Hence, my M&P .45c

I prefer DA/SA for this method of carry because of that nagging doubt in the back of my mind that I might miss the safety in the heat of the moment.

The M&P is normally relegated to carry in those States with magazine limits.

I find no difference in time from holster to first shot between the two guns out to about 15 yards. Beyond 15 yards the M&P is a little faster but if you start talking really long range or precision shooting the DA/SA takes back the lead.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

HoosierQ
  • Locked
Striker Fired and DA vs SA - M&P?
Replies
10
Views
2K
9mmepiphany
9mmepiphany
Good Ol' Boy
  • Locked
DA/SA Question
2 3
Replies
55
Views
5K
Plan2Live
P
J
  • Locked
Strikers vs. hammers
Replies
4
Views
546
Odd Job
Odd Job
WrongHanded
  • Locked
What is a "DA/SA transition"?
2 3
Replies
72
Views
3K
9mmepiphany
9mmepiphany
S
  • Locked
General Question DA v SA
Replies
1
Views
337
9mmepiphany
9mmepiphany
Back
Top