Why does the U.S. military require manual safeties on pistols?

"Does anybody know why the U.S. military is so enamored of manual safeties?"

Experience.

Care to expand on that okie?

how about, out of any given population

50% of the people are bellow average IQ.

There are three ways to do something: The right way, the wrong way and the Army way.

Ever work a military firing line? I do it every day and while you do get classes of shooters there that are "into shooting" or the nature of their job requires them to be more proficent with firearms, these are the exceptions rather than the rule. Most of the classes we teach deal with the base populace types, the cooks and bakers and candlestick makers. You can preach safety to them all day long but when you still remove them from the firing line because they sweep the firing line or other times leave their booger hooks on the boom buttons and accidently fire a round (yes, I've seen both instances like that happen) you come to realize that a manual safety isn't a bad idea at all!

To those it offends to have to remember to disengage a safety, you have the option of not (re) enlisting. Besides the Army prefers to use artillery or air support much more than side arms.

A safety adds another action, another level of complication. What if you forget to decock something like an M9 and don't realize it? What if you think the safety is on, but it's not?

Click to expand...

The weapons that are used frequently, rifles, all have safeties...why wouldn't a pistol? Why is it difficult to operate a manual safety on a pistol, but not on a rifle?

U.S. soldiers somehow less capable than Austrian, Indians, Irish, Norwegians, Dutch, etc.?

Click to expand...

Now, pretend we are "objective".

Given the abilities, capabilities and experience of the armies you mentioned, which army and "equipment" would you most likely emulate? In other "words", how would those other armies even know if manual safeties are good or bad in wartime?

This is an interesting thread, especially watching as some seem to support the use of safeties in the military, but distance themselves from them for LE/civilian use.

Paraphrase: Civilians are better trained, less stressed (distracted), and the consequences of an AD/ND are lower for a civilian.

Click to expand...

I understand those that would like to see the military use DAO, and I understand those that think safeties are good for both. Those are just differences in opinion, and have been beaten to death. :banghead:

I'd love to hear more from those that think the military definitely SHOULD have a safety, and LE and/or CCW definitely SHOULD NOT. That seems an undefendable position to me... BTW - I'm interested because of the heat I've taken for adding a thumb safety to my Glock 26...

the few % of above average IQ Soldiers are probably on this forum.

For the rest IMHO it´s a very good idea to have an "ON/OFF"
button on the gun.
(You might want to make them look like on playstations in the future)

...but even for everyone else...me and you all
like someone said before:
After 3 days without sleep with your incompetent
CIC making corrupt decisions, not enough vehicle or bodyarmor
and IEDs and Suicidebombs everywhere....
I would love to have an ON/OFF Button, and by God
even for smart guys like us the ON/OFF Symbol from
playstations/TVs etc would not be a bad idea.

02$.
Mp7

Fine. I'll come right out and say it, and there's not a serviceman here who will disagree with me.

When I was in the Marine Corps I met both the finest human beings and the biggest idiots on the planet.

The safeties are for group 2.

When I was in the Marine Corps I met both the finest human beings and the biggest idiots on the planet.

Click to expand...

I appreciate your candor - but, it certainly doesn't follow that LE/civilians that CCW are brighter - at least not the ones I've met!!

The folks I've met at ranges, in my CCW class, cops, etc.... most are good-hearted people, but at least for many their day job isn't as a rocket scientist...

Many that bash safeties kind of go the other way - a safety is too "complicated" so "guns for dummies" should never have a safety. I've never understood this - I've always felt if a mistake had to be made, I'd rather chance me forgetting to take the safety off and getting shot, compared to me shooting someone unintentionally...

Note that's my personal position with striker-fired light trigger pulls (ie Glock). I carry a DAO revolver with a long 12lb pull - no craving for a safety on that!

I appreciate your candor - but, it certainly doesn't follow that LE/civilians that CCW are brighter - at least not the ones I've met!!

Click to expand...

I didn't say that civilians are smarter or crazier or taller. I merely said that I met men who who would single-handedly face down an entire armed nation to protect America (the finest) and men who I wouldn't give powdered soap to, for fear they'd somehow put out an eye with it (the biggest idiots).

When I was flying heavies we transitioned from the S&W M56 (model 15) to the M9. We loaded at a clearing barrel, decocked, and carried it safety off.

US military-small arms...

As a US Army veteran, 4 years/active duty, I can tell you honestly that many service members get way to worked up over small arms, . A few officers/NCOs/lower enlisted had what I'd call the right frame of mind; that weapons are not toys, that they should be secured but within reach while deployed/in the field/etc and that proper training can reduce ADs/incidents. I feel that far to many people who enlist keep the same fear/ill will about guns then lash out for very petty reasons. All the regs and red tape around weapons/ammo show how the US Army is way to amped over small arms too. Soldiers go through the same weapons training the same way. Bias, condisending or slanted views should not keep soldiers from carrying or using loaded weapons if needed.

Rusty

When I was in the Navy from 1974-1980 when perfoming sentry duties we carried .45 autos with in flap holsters with no mag in the weapon and 2 loaded mags in the belt , the primary purpose of the sentry was to sound the alarm ! We were in a secure location (tied uo to a tender in the middle of a harbor ) with a Marine detachment aboard ! We were told that the biggest hazzard to armed sentries was other armed sentries and boredom !! we/I would have prefered a loaded revolver with 6 shots ready than to an unloaded auto ! but we didnt make the rules ! The use of a safety on a sidearm is of little consequence to a soldier in the field if it gets down to fighting with sidearms it is most likely not a gunfight anymore but has become hand to hand combat ! The use of a safety makes little diference ! Kevin

Does the military NOT carry condition 3, anyway? I guess that depends on duty? I mean, maybe MP guards carry hammer down, safety on, don't know. Heck, back in "the day", most MPs around air bases were armed with a Smith and Wesson .38 revolver.

Well, since you asked...

"On March 17, 1845,Captain Terrett, First Dragoons, was dismounting from his horse on the parade ground. He had withdrawn his pistol from its holster, which was attached to the saddle, and somehow the reins became entangled in the lock. The pistol discharged and fatally wounded Terrett, who died within a few minutes."

Leo E. Olisen, "Fort Scott: Courage and Conflict on the Border," page 49.

It also pays to remember that for the majority of the years the armed forces have issued a semi auto, it was single action, for which you would surely want a safety. For that matter, in the vast majority of the years since 1775 the armed forces have issued single action handguns.

The Austrian Government adopted the Glock 17 in 1980, followed quickly by the Netherlands and Sweden.

Click to expand...

Close...

1963 - Glock GesmbH established in Deutsch-Wagram
1963 - Glock's first product: plastic curtain rods
1970s - Plastic kitchen boxes, machine gun ammo belts, shovels, and utility knives are offered.
1980 - Company founder Gaston Glock starts developing a gun
1982 - The Austrian army decides on the Glock 17
1984 - With service in the Norwegian army, the Glock leaves Austria
1986 - G18 introduced
1986 - Glock Inc. in Smyrna, GA, established
1988 - G17L and G19 introduced
1988 - All Glocks get serrated frontstraps and backstraps
1990 - G22 and G23 introduced: the first ever .40 S&W guns
1990 - G20 and G21 introduced
1994 - G24 introduced
1995 - G25, G26 and G27 introduced
1997 - G29 and G30 introduced
1998 - G31, G32, G33, G34, G35 introduced
1999 - G36 introduced

Ive seen military training videos where they teach them to carry in DA mode. When they get into a firefight, they have the first DA pull followed by SA pulls. When all is over, they decock, turn the safety back off and leave it in DA mode.

There's a "Safety Button" because real life doesn't come with a "Reset Button"

My brother is an MP and he was telling me he carries his M9 safety off with the hammer cocked back to the hammer safety catch. (halfcock) Along with most of the soldiers in his unit that are going to Iraq that have pistols. If you ever tried to put a beretta 92 at halfcock on safe it takes significantly more force to work the decocker on the safety than fully cocked or completely decocked. Kind of acts like a safety to prevent accidentally putting the pistol on safe. Then again he is an MP and they carry pistols all the time doing police work on base.