1911 grip safety: why?

[jungle]

I have never seen any military manual listing hammer down on a loaded round as a standard condition and have never seen this practiced by any military user, it is more fumble prone than condition three. Poorly trained people are prone to do all sorts of odd things with weapons they don't understand and the 1911 is not immune to poor handling. Is it safe to carry a 1911 hammer down on a loaded round? Yes, for the most part, but what advantage would this offer over cocked and locked or condition three? The disadvantage is the slow time to readiness and danger of lowering the hammer on a live round and perhaps this is the reason for the larger spur. The practice was recognized as dangerous, but people did it anyway.

Back to the original question of the grip safety. It is apparent that the grip safety plays no role in a pistol carried cocked and locked, hammer down on a loaded round, or condition three. So when does it come into play?
Only in a cocked and unlocked pistol, and it serves to block the trigger when the user drops the weapon or lets it dangle from a lanyard as mentioned before. Speculation on what JMB, the Army board or ill informed users have done in the past doesn't change the function of the grip safety.

One other thing many forget is that the thumb safety blocks hammer movement to some degree in a 1911 even if the sear or hammer notch were to break.

 

[Old Fuff]

... and danger of lowering the hammer on a live round and perhaps this is the reason for the larger spur. The practice was recognized as dangerous, but people did it anyway.

It seems unlikely that the Army and Colt would modify the pistol to incorporate a feature that would encourage something that "was recognized as dangerous." It would seem that instead they would both go out of their way to condemn the practice in both military manuals and commercial instruction sheets.

Wouldn't they?

 

[jungle]

Not mentioning hammer down on a loaded round is proof that the manuals didn't approve of it. Find a recommendation of this method in a military or commercial manual and I'll be happy to retract that statement, but I don't think you will.

Speculation in this case diverges from official Military documentation of the proper methods of carry. The wide spur for easier cocking sounds good, but I have yet to see any military manuals or members advocate carry in this way. It wasn't the first or last time a piece of military hardware was modified without regard to training documents or prevailing use.

Old Fuff, I see that you don't advocate carry with the hammer down on a loaded round and coming from someone with your expertise that is enough for me (at least in this case).

 

[default]

Although I have nothing vital or revolutionary to contribute to this thread, I have to say that seeing the history and design of the 1911 discussed by folks like 1911Tuner and Old Fuff is one of the true pleasures of THR, and I thank them and others like them for their contributions.

As for the topic at hand, I believe the grip safety on the 1911 is broadly similar, in principle at least, to the GLOCK trigger safety and the squeeze-cocking mechanism on the HK P7/PSP. That is to say, an attempt to include a sort of "dead man's switch", in order to further ensure some sort of positive control over the pistol immediately prior to firing. We could argue until the cows come home whether or not the 1911 grip safety is necessary, whether or not the GLOCK trigger safety constitutes a "safety" at all, or how likely it is likely that one will remember to squeeze the frontstrap of their P7 at a stressful moment, but these features, irrespective of other safety mechanisms on the pistols discussed, do differentiate them from most, if not all, other handguns.

 

[Old Fuff]

Old Fuff, I see that you don't advocate carry with the hammer down on a loaded round and coming from someone with your expertise that is enough for me (at least in this case).

No I don't. But on countless ocasions I have unholster the pistol, flipped down the safety lock, and then lowered the hammer on a loaded chamber prior to setting the piece aside.

Historically, many users carried the pistol and Browning/Colt's earlier .38 pistols with the hammer down on a loaded (or unloaded) chamber. The practice wasn't condemned until recent times (post 1970's) and I acknowledge that those who march to a different drummer can, if they wish, carry in this mode. Unquestionably the reason for modifying the hammer as I described was to facilitate thumb cocking, and I highly doubt that this was done to provide for lowering the hammer following field stripping the pistol. It would also seem doubtful that the Army and/or Colt's would go to the trouble that they did if they strongly objected to the practice of carrying in this mode (hammer down/empty or loaded chamber).

It should be remembered that in 1911 military officers as well as civilian users were used to carrying Colt .38 automatics with the hammer down on an empty chamber - or a loaded one - because there was no other option. Time has erased the memory of these first Colt pistols, but historical references have not forgoten them, or how they were used.

Truly understanding the 1911 pistol requires also understanding its history - where it came from, how it did, and why. Those that carried it differently then is generally done today were not necessarily incompetent - just different.

 

[1911Tuner]

Field Manuals and Such

Only thing that I can add to this debate is that, although various field manuals
and Army regulations never endorsed...or actually forbade C-3...most of the time, the men who were actually carrying the pistol into harm's way were far, far removed from Division HQ or anyone else who made or enforced the rules,
and the general attitude was: "To hell with your regulations. I'm tryin' to stay alive out here." ...and did pretty much as they pleased if they felt like it would increase their chances of accomplishing that particular mission.

The exchange would probably go somethin' like this:

"Sargeant! You will clear that weapon and you will KEEP it clear until danger is clear and present!"

"Aye Major." Shuck-Shuck/clickety-click. *mumble-grumble* (Overheard muttered as a whisper. (You can kiss my &%#@** SIR! You ain't the one
that'll be layin' over at GR if I don't SEE clear and present in time to rack the SOB.)

...shuck-shuck...click. *mumble-grumble*..."&$%#@ Army regulations, my"...
Well...You get the picture.

 

[jungle]

True understanding. I guess in some cases this translates to "historical performance does not imply future gains". The hammer design has become largely moot in modern usage.
I will agree that troops will do things at odds with the current FMs, but it would be interesting to find a quote from any FM or commercial manual supporting hammer down on a loaded round. These quotes are indeed rarer than hens teeth and that is why we won't see one. Just anecdotes of how some people did things before they knew better.

 

[Old Fuff]

The Short Hammer .38 (Colt 1908 Pocket Model .38/Hammer) is an excellent fighting pistol, as it is free from the complications of latter types. There is no safety catch, but it has a half cock bent to the hammer, and owing to the inertia type striker, a cartridge can be carried in the chamber with the hammer down. It is, in the opinion of many one of the best Colt pistols ever produced.

Textbook of Automatic Pistols: by R. K. Wilson. p. 198

Originally published in 1934, Wilson was an influential writer of that day in the handgun field, and his views reflected the thinking of that time. This is not to say that the Old Fuff is in full agreement, but rather to explain that hammer down on a loaded chamber was an acceptable procedure – at least up to the 1970’s.

 

[jungle]

This has what to do with a 1911? If we go back far enough we can find people who carried the 1873 with six rounds in the cylinder, it was a common and dangerous practice then and now.
Still no luck on a 1911 quote?

Before we drift off into the esoterica of hammmer shape again, any comments on the original question about the grip safety?


" ...the 1908 pocket model is...an excellent fighting pistol" This sort of thing would damage the credibility of any current writer and must have sounded funny even at the turn of the century.

 

[Jim Watson]

Tom Florich said in Henry Stebbins' 1960 'Pistols, a Modern Encyclopedia' that the greatest advantage of the 1911 was that it could be safely carried with the hammer down. (He really preferred a DA revolver, though.)

In my youth I read stuff like that and listened to FLD who carried his Commander in Condition 2. I even have a Commander with G.M. spur hammer and grip safety installed for the purpose. It doesn't get used that way any more, I finally realized that FLD used C2 was because he was lefthanded and had grown up pre-ambi safety. So I now use the safety and the spur hammer stays only because it is set to a decent trigger pull.

So that kind of sets the time frame for Condition 2.

 

[poppy]

I have a reason for the easy cocking hammer on the 1911: So the movie actor can cock the gun to intimidate the bad guy.

But in all seriousness, Tuner is probably the closest to being right.

 

[1911Tuner]

*chuckle*

Wonder what ol' John Moses would think about us arguin' about his pistol almost a hundred years after he got done with it.

He'd probably say somethin' like:

"Ya'll STILL ain't got that thing figgered out???"

Bet he'd also say...or think:

"Look...If ya wanna lower the hammer on a hot chamber, it's okay. Just be careful...It's a damn gun, fer cryin' out loud."

How many of us goin'---> at the thought of somebody lowerin' the hammer and thumb cockin' a 1911 have decocked a double-action revolver, and never given it a second thought? Me, for one. Anybody else? Aw...C'mon! Let's have a show of hands. Sure ya have...and you'll probably do it again. Just be careful, fer cryin' out loud. It's a GUN!

 

[jungle]

Can you lower the hammer safely on a live round? Sure, but knowing what you do now, why in JMB's name would you want to?
I think the method of carry involving a round under a hammer down in the 1911 has been abandoned for quite some time(since it's inception if Military manuals are the standard), so why would anyone want to do this, what are the advantages, and why would anyone consider condition three or condition one inferior choices? Customs established with different weapons prior to the 1911?

I don't doubt that it has been done and will be done, or even that it can safely be done, my only question is why in the heck would anyone do it under current conditions?

What are the advantages?

 

[jc2]

OF -

I'm not too sure about your source (or maybe your typing ). The Colt 1908 was a "hammerless" (enclosed hammer) model with a safety. If the author was speaking of the "COLT MODEL 1903 POCKET HAMMER," it might have been "an excellent fighting pistol" in his opinion, but based on its sales and longevity not many people agreed with him.

Tuner -

How many of us goin'---> at the thought of somebody lowerin' the hammer and thumb cockin' a 1911 have decocked a double-action revolver, and never given it a second thought?

I have decocked a number of double (and single action) revolvers (as well as a few 1911s/BHPs), BUT I have always given it a second thought before I did (at least watching my cousin plant a slug about two-inches from his right foot decocking one).

 

[1911Tuner]

Cousins

jc2 said:

>BUT I have always given it a second thought before I did (at least watching my cousin plant a slug about two-inches from his right foot decocking one).<
****************

See? John Moses TOLD ya that ya hadda be careful!

Actually, I meant..without giving it a second thought afterward. We all think about it while we're doin' it.

Jungle...There are a few...very few...situations in which C-2 would make sense.

Mud-boggin' on a 4-wheeler is one...when you want to keep as much gunk out of the works as possible. Usually goes along with a full-flap holster, and does add to the protection a bit. Retains the option of one-hand operation if needed. Others will come to mind. Not your normal, every-day scenarios, to be sure...but it's still a viable carry option in those odd times and places.

 

[RON in PA]

Just have to throw in the Radom 1935, a cavalry weapon with grip safety, decocker and no thumb safety. What would JMB say?

 

[Old Fuff]

jc2:

It's my darn ol' keyboard messing up again...

Actually I am having some trouble typing because of an osteoarthritis condition.

Anyway, Colt made the 1903 Pocket Hammer until 1929 and started in 1903. That's not too shabby a run. The exact number is in question because they intermixed serial numbers with the 1902 Military. But so far as the mode of carry is concerned the models 1902 Military, 1902 Sporting and 1903 Pocket Hammer were all the same.

Jungle:

Indeed yes, the earlier .38 pistols established the hammer down/loaded chamber carry mode, and it remained popular until sometime around 1970. There were, and still are, many people who remain unconfortable with cocked and locked. Neither I (or I believe) Tuner advocate or recommend this mode of carry, but I (we) accept it as an option that under some circumstances can ge a good (best?) choice. Browning and Colt knew this, and in 1911 the Army must have been aware of it, so this is why the original pistol had the style of hammer it did, and so far as Colt was concerned the style remained until late in World War Two.

In the end it comes down to a matter of choice. One can carry in whatever way they think best.

 

[makarovnik]

Calvary Pistol

I'm just guessing here but I wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that originally these pistols were designed to be fired while riding a horse. Autoloaders where relatively new and maybe the Army felt safer with the extra safety feature. I'm not sure it's needed anymore but the XD's and some other new designs have them. The old H&K P7 actually has a grip safety on the front of the grip. Weird huh?

 

[progunner1957]

1911 grip safety and advanced state of readiness

I have never heard this advocated by any of the 1911 experts, but the following has occurred to me:

Say you are carrying a 1911 in condition one and suddenly find yourself in a situation where the "stuff" is about to hit the fan but hostilities have not yet commenced.

You could discreetly reach under your jacket/shirt, click off the thumb safety for an advanced state of readiness and the gun is still on safe, thanks to the grip safety.

Yes, you would need to remember to re-engage the thumb safety if the situation went away and you did not need to draw & present the weapon.

What do you folks think?

 

[Old Fuff]

While my superfast draw is more then lightning fast...

I still find I have enough time to disengage the safety lock (manual safety) between the time the pistol leaves the leather and when it's pointed toward whatever. Anyway, as soon as the pistol is gripped the grip safety becomes a moot point because it's "off" anyway.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

I'm just guessing here but I wonder if it has anything to do with the fact that originally these pistols were designed to be fired while riding a horse. Autoloaders where relatively new and maybe the Army felt safer with the extra safety feature.

Correct. Browning himself originally proposed no safety at all, just a half-cock. The Army demanded both a safety lock and a grip safety. The functional proponent for pistols -- even to this day -- is the Armor Branch, successors to the Cavalry.

 

[Jamie C.]

I've got an uncle that did 2 years in Vietnam.... this was from 1966 'til 1968....

At one point, camp regulations forbade them from carrying weapons loaded.... all sidearms were required to be magazine-free. ( I don't recall the reason for this, or the location of the camp in relation to where the actual combat was supposed to be. )

On one occasion, a VC got into camp, and was promptly shot by one of the soldiers with an "empty" pistol....

Seems that the SOP for the G.I.s was to simply carry one in the chamber, hammer down, with no mag in place while in camp.... It kept the "brass" happy, and that one round gave them at least a little peace of mind.

I wish I could recall the details of this story a little better, but it's been quite a few years since it was told to me. I do seem to recall that camp regs were changed after the sapper incident though.


J.C.

 

[SAWBONES]

There's an awful lot of simplistic, non-critical thinking out there.
I've always noticed in discussions during formal firearms training and in Internet gun-related bulletin board posts the tendency for what amounts to almost a superstitious dread of certain actions and activities, to wit:

Lowering the hammer on any loaded SA semiauto, especially the 1911;

"Press-checking" the 1911 via the traditional index finger-on-the-recoil spring plug and thumb-in-the-triggerguard method;

Altering ANY kind of firearms safety device, for ANY reason.

Then there's the slavish references to the "Four Rules", all of which actually are meant to apply to active (that is to say, defensive plus offensive) firearms handling, NOT to "administrative" firearms handling (eg, carrying within a holster, cleaning, storing).

Some folks always seem to like to appeal to a "standard of authority", and will cite Rule Two when arguing against (for instance) crossdraw or shoulder holsters, or cite Rule One as inviolable (but if Rule One were always and at all times true, you could never clean your guns nor practice dry-firing!).

These "Rules" are pithy guides promulgated by Jeff Cooper as an easy-to-remember series of points which should be borne in mind when handling firearms.
They're not Laws of Nature.

My point is that if you're a careful, attentive, reasonably intelligent and responsible adult, you can do lots of things with relative safety or with acceptably low risk, including going out in the rain without your galoshes, fishing the toast out of the toaster with a fork and lots of other things your mommy warned you never to do when you were little, if you know how.

This is beyond a lot of foks' comprehension or ability to accept, I know, and I'm certainly NOT recommending that we should exercise unsafe gun handling practices or be cavalier in the way we handle firearms at all, just that some people can sometimes do some things occasionally, or even routinely (such as press-checking or practicing CCW by using a shoulder rig) with excellent and long term safety.

Lots of folks were doing these things long before most of the people reading posts on this BB were born, and none of them died or caused the inadvertent death of others from firearms accidents, either.
Guns are dangerous machines. They're meant to be so, and wouldn't be useful otherwise. Life is risky too, and can't be made risk free, nor would be worth living if it could be made so.