ChronoCube
Member
I am making a modification to a firearm, and one of the obstacles I'm running into could be overcome by disabling the safety. Is this legal?
Legal to disable safety?
- Thread starter ChronoCube
- Start date
- Status
"legal" in the sense of violating any criminal code? Doubtful.
"legal" in the sense of increasing your liability, possibly.
"legal" in the sense of increasing your liability, possibly.
cliffy
member
Don't disable Your safety!
Commonsense would dictate NO! Safeties are installed to make you a safe shooter. Although safeties don't make you automatically safe, they surely assist. Commonsense should dictate, "Don't do it!" Are you asking for problems from "Anti-Gun NUTS?" My rifles are as safe as safe can be, because I don't defeat safety features. cliffy
Commonsense would dictate NO! Safeties are installed to make you a safe shooter. Although safeties don't make you automatically safe, they surely assist. Commonsense should dictate, "Don't do it!" Are you asking for problems from "Anti-Gun NUTS?" My rifles are as safe as safe can be, because I don't defeat safety features. cliffy
WardenWolf
member
That would depend on the type of gun and the type of safety. If we're talking an M91/30, where the "safety" is almost unusable and more than a tad hazardous, fine. If we're talking a modern firearm, I believe there are laws requiring firearms be manufactured with a safety device, and you may be violating those.
cliffy
member
What the difference?
Safeties are to keep people safe from stupidity. A finger is the greatest safety, but mechanical assistance HELPS. cliffy
Safeties are to keep people safe from stupidity. A finger is the greatest safety, but mechanical assistance HELPS. cliffy
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
This is twice in one week where someone has invented a law like this. Cite it, if it exists!
AND, even if there WAS a law somewhere that said that a manufacturer must build a gun with a functional safety, he's NOT manufacturing it nor selling it. He's modifying HIS OWN PROPERTY for his own use -- NOT inviolation of NFA or GCA.
There are (depending on who's numbers you believe) 20,000 - 60,000 firearms laws on the books in this country. And yet WE have to keep inventing MORE! Sheesh.
-Sam
highorder
Member
Nevermind the (nonexistant) laws,
what firearm, and why?
benEzra
Moderator Emeritus
As others have said, depends on the firearm.
Deactivating the safety on a gun that uses the safety as a decocker or to lock the firing pin would be a very bad idea.
Deactivating the safety on a gun that uses the safety as a decocker or to lock the firing pin would be a very bad idea.
catspa
Member
Dear Abby,
I have an air pistol that I was working on the other day, and from the time I bought it, I've been annoyed that when I shoot it left-handed, my normal grip engages the safety (trigger block). I tend not to rely on mechanical safety devices, and don't usually use the trigger blocks on my guns, but this one keeps getting in the way. So I removed it, and put it and the itty bitty spring and ball bearing in a labelled ziplock bag.
Right now, I'm the only one who shoots this pistol, and I suppose if I sell or give it away I would put the original parts back, but I'm enjoying it now without the safety.
Here's my question: Will my fellow THR members berate me for doing this?
Puzzled in Perpetuity
I have an air pistol that I was working on the other day, and from the time I bought it, I've been annoyed that when I shoot it left-handed, my normal grip engages the safety (trigger block). I tend not to rely on mechanical safety devices, and don't usually use the trigger blocks on my guns, but this one keeps getting in the way. So I removed it, and put it and the itty bitty spring and ball bearing in a labelled ziplock bag.
Right now, I'm the only one who shoots this pistol, and I suppose if I sell or give it away I would put the original parts back, but I'm enjoying it now without the safety.
Here's my question: Will my fellow THR members berate me for doing this?
Puzzled in Perpetuity
Sam1911
Moderator Emeritus
Dear Puzzled,
You have a perfectly acceptable reason to remove the offending device for several reasons:
1) It causes demonstrable interference to you while shooting,
2) Your use of that weapon is limited to very controlled circumstances and using very specific practices which will not be aided by a safety device nor made less safe without it,
3) The weapon in question is of very limited lethality and range so even the grossest act of negligence attenuated by the lack of a safety device has fairly limited repurcussions.
Surely no one would deride your choices in this case.
Were any of these conditions untrue, however -- say for example, this was a striker-fired handgun without redundant safety mechanisms, firing a substantially lethal cartridge, and intended to be carried about in society as a defensive arm -- the answer would be very different.
Important distinctions abound!
By the way, thanks for the opportunity to say something constructive and useful about firearms! I so rarely do so, it seems, that I feel like a whole new person!
-Abby
----------------
Note: No fictional "Abigail Van Burens" were harmed during the production of this message...though one in particular was mildly lampooned.
-Sam
You have a perfectly acceptable reason to remove the offending device for several reasons:
1) It causes demonstrable interference to you while shooting,
2) Your use of that weapon is limited to very controlled circumstances and using very specific practices which will not be aided by a safety device nor made less safe without it,
3) The weapon in question is of very limited lethality and range so even the grossest act of negligence attenuated by the lack of a safety device has fairly limited repurcussions.
Surely no one would deride your choices in this case.
Were any of these conditions untrue, however -- say for example, this was a striker-fired handgun without redundant safety mechanisms, firing a substantially lethal cartridge, and intended to be carried about in society as a defensive arm -- the answer would be very different.
Important distinctions abound!
By the way, thanks for the opportunity to say something constructive and useful about firearms! I so rarely do so, it seems, that I feel like a whole new person!
-Abby
----------------
Note: No fictional "Abigail Van Burens" were harmed during the production of this message...though one in particular was mildly lampooned.
-Sam
tulsamal
Member
I have a really nice Browning Hi Power. People told me for years that I could get a better trigger pull if I disabled the magazine safety. It isn't as if I LIKE the magazine safety, I think the darn thing is worse than pointless.
But I was swayed by people who told me that it could increase my liability if it was used in a shooting. I would be portrayed in civil court as reckless enough to remove a safety device. So I didn't do it for a long time.
Then I had it at my gunsmith for some other general work. And he brought it up again. Said he could removed the magazine safety and do some smoothing out to the trigger. I decided to do it. And he was right. The trigger pull on that gun is much better now. And I appreciate being able to lower the hammer when I'm cleaning it or something without the magazine in the gun.
As far as the liability, I decided it really didn't apply to me. I'm never going to carry that HP. I'm never going to use it for a home defense gun. If I was going to grab a gun to defend myself, it would be about number 40 down the list. So for a fun range gun, I'm not too worried about it anymore!
Gregg
But I was swayed by people who told me that it could increase my liability if it was used in a shooting. I would be portrayed in civil court as reckless enough to remove a safety device. So I didn't do it for a long time.
Then I had it at my gunsmith for some other general work. And he brought it up again. Said he could removed the magazine safety and do some smoothing out to the trigger. I decided to do it. And he was right. The trigger pull on that gun is much better now. And I appreciate being able to lower the hammer when I'm cleaning it or something without the magazine in the gun.
As far as the liability, I decided it really didn't apply to me. I'm never going to carry that HP. I'm never going to use it for a home defense gun. If I was going to grab a gun to defend myself, it would be about number 40 down the list. So for a fun range gun, I'm not too worried about it anymore!
Gregg
Guy de Loimbard
Member
It's legal. Whether it may increase liability is up for debate it looks like. I have a Marlin rifle that I removed the safety from, and replaced with a pin that looks like a screw. I never did like that safety, you could still pull the trigger with it on and it let the hammer whack the safety pretty good. Now I just use the half-cock position as a safety. It's so much nicer. I doubt I'd ever use it for home defense as I have more handier guns to use for that, so liability is a moot point for that particular gun.
Animal Mother
Member
IANAL, but it is almost certainly legal to disable a safety on a handgun that you own, for your own private use. I've never heard a law prohibiting the end user of a firearm from disabling the safety.
If there ever was a negligent or accidental discharge of the firearm resulting in harm to an individual you would likely face an increased level of scrutiny due to the disabled safety. This could possibly result in some criminal or civil action (i.e. involuntary manslaughter). If you are willing to accept the risk of that possibility go right ahead.
On a personal note, I hate the safety levers that have been forced on to the Tokarev pistols that were recently imported. If I get around to picking up one, I would likely have the safety removed as the pistol wasn't designed for it in the first place. Also, if I bought a S&W with a Hillary Hole installed, I'd at least investigate the possibility of disabling that ugly little piece of engineering, liability or not.
If there ever was a negligent or accidental discharge of the firearm resulting in harm to an individual you would likely face an increased level of scrutiny due to the disabled safety. This could possibly result in some criminal or civil action (i.e. involuntary manslaughter). If you are willing to accept the risk of that possibility go right ahead.
On a personal note, I hate the safety levers that have been forced on to the Tokarev pistols that were recently imported. If I get around to picking up one, I would likely have the safety removed as the pistol wasn't designed for it in the first place. Also, if I bought a S&W with a Hillary Hole installed, I'd at least investigate the possibility of disabling that ugly little piece of engineering, liability or not.
Last edited:
WardenWolf
member
They're not bad. I actually like my Tokarev's safety. My thumb rests squarely on it and I can flick it off without a thought. It was VERY stiff when I first received it, but I immediately put some Breakfree on it and within a minute or so I was able to operate it easily.
ChronoCube
Member
For those of you who asked, it's a Hi Point 9mm carbine. I am trying to lighten the horrendously heavy trigger, and the only way to do that seems to be to shift the resting position of the sear and trigger assembly, but that keeps the safety stuck in off mode.
SMMAssociates
Member
ChronoCube:
IMHO, removing a manufacturer-supplied safety device from a carry gun is asking for a nasty civil suit in the event you actually use the gun. (Not that you won't necessarily get into such a suit anyway, but it doesn't help your odds.... The other guy's lawyer will be out for every cent you ever got near, and that'll help him.)
It probably doesn't matter, though, if your friendly neighborhood gunsmith does it without telling you, but they tend to keep detailed records for their own protection. "Now how did that happen?" may not work....
Guess the best defense is to never buy one of those guns....
Removing keylock devices, IMHO (IANAL), is another story - unless somebody gets their hand on the gun, there shouldn't be much there for the Civil Court sharks. It might take a little persuasion, but those are STORAGE devices, IMHO, like the little bike locks that now come with most (all?) guns. I wouldn't worry about that. Or just don't buy it....
Between us, too, I wouldn't admit to knowing what a High Point IS
.... (Actually, I'm told that their long guns are pretty decent.)
I expect more than one state requires that all the safety widgets be working to sell a gun, including the bike lock, but once you get your hands on it, the real issue is whether or not you're going to carry it. (If you've got a good solid Castle you still may be at risk, btw, IMHO.)
Regards,
IMHO, removing a manufacturer-supplied safety device from a carry gun is asking for a nasty civil suit in the event you actually use the gun. (Not that you won't necessarily get into such a suit anyway, but it doesn't help your odds.... The other guy's lawyer will be out for every cent you ever got near, and that'll help him.)
It probably doesn't matter, though, if your friendly neighborhood gunsmith does it without telling you, but they tend to keep detailed records for their own protection. "Now how did that happen?" may not work....
Guess the best defense is to never buy one of those guns....
Removing keylock devices, IMHO (IANAL), is another story - unless somebody gets their hand on the gun, there shouldn't be much there for the Civil Court sharks. It might take a little persuasion, but those are STORAGE devices, IMHO, like the little bike locks that now come with most (all?) guns. I wouldn't worry about that. Or just don't buy it....
Between us, too, I wouldn't admit to knowing what a High Point IS
.... (Actually, I'm told that their long guns are pretty decent.)I expect more than one state requires that all the safety widgets be working to sell a gun, including the bike lock, but once you get your hands on it, the real issue is whether or not you're going to carry it. (If you've got a good solid Castle you still may be at risk, btw, IMHO.)
Regards,
Have there every been any lawsuits or other legal consequences from altering or removing a safety? I have a C&S(Cylinder & Slide) trigger in my Browning HP and would not go back.
I have a few of the side safety Marlins and am lukewarm about it. I have had a few hammer clicks where I failed to turn it off, but since my shooting is primaily for fun it's no big deal. I have thought about the "o" ring fix though. I grew up using the half cock and slightly dropped lever as safety on this gun so feel it is really unnecessary.
I have a few of the side safety Marlins and am lukewarm about it. I have had a few hammer clicks where I failed to turn it off, but since my shooting is primaily for fun it's no big deal. I have thought about the "o" ring fix though. I grew up using the half cock and slightly dropped lever as safety on this gun so feel it is really unnecessary.
Dark Skies
Member
I've considered doing the same with the incredibly ugly button safety on my Winchester 1894 Trapper.
There is a procedure for doing this quite neatly - I just haven't got around to it yet.
There is a procedure for doing this quite neatly - I just haven't got around to it yet.
- Status
