Discussion in 'Handguns: Autoloaders' started by chipperi, Oct 4, 2008.
A video I made about the Taurus Safety Flaw.
With all due respect, your video troubles me.
Yes, it might take a "light amount of pressure" but it takes a large amount of trigger travel to move the trigger back far enough to engage the safety in front of the trigger. A person would have to violate one of the basic tenants of gun safety by not only having your finger on the trigger...but pressing it almost 1/2 an inch while engaging the safety, to have this condition occur. Also, it is immediately obvious, to anyone who owns and handles the gun, that the trigger, when set back behind the safety, is in a set back position.
I'm not saying that this was the best safety design Taurus could have made, on the other hand, I think your video is deceptive because it glosses over how obvious a mistake the operator has to make in order for this condition to occur when you say it just takes a "light amount of pressure." Just saying one should keep their finger off the trigger doesn't make it obvious that one has to, not only wrongly put their finger on the trigger, but also squeeze the trigger quite a bit for this condition to occur.
It is particularly troubling to see this kind of rhetoric from a gun owner who, I assume, believes we should have the right to own guns because it is arguments like these that are used against guns in general by the antigunners and ambulance chasing lawyers to indict all guns and gun owners.
When in SA the trigger travel is a lot less than a quarter of an inch. If you pull the trigger back maybe the thickness if the trigger and engage the safety this will occur and you really cannot tell it has happened by looking at the trigger. Yes one would have to violate one of the four commandments that is why I said that the best safety is to keep your finger off of the trigger. It is not rhetoric and I am a very pro gun and a very safety conscious person, who has seen plenty of novice gun owners in a situation where they could make this mistake. I wish everyone in the country would give guns a try before knocking them but I would also like to educate those who may not be aware of the problem before an accident happens, so as not to give those neck collar attorneys a chance to apply their deceptive trade.
You are incorrect.
I measured the distance with a guage. In the normal positon the there is 25mm of room between the dished part of the trigger and the trigger guard. With the safety set in front the trigger there is 30mm of room. That difference is .2 inches....a bit less than the 1/4" I said but considerably more than the 1/8th (.125), you suggest it is less than.
Perhaps it is a little different from gun to gun, but I suspect not a lot different. It is simple geometry. In order for the trigger to be behind the safety it has to move the thickness of the safety up inside the trigger mechanism. That thickness, when multiplied by the mechanical ratio of the trigger, is much greater than one eighth of an inch, at the trigger.
Additionally, you have to take up first the light trigger slack, then the heavier trigger slack. If you just press gently on the trigger the light slack will be taken up and you can feel a heavier slack occur. You have to keep pressing while engaging the safety in order to engage the safety. This is incredibly stupid unsafe behavior.
Finally, the trigger feels way different when coming up against the safety and when pressing the trigger behind it. The safety holds the trigger forward rigidly and the trigger hits a hard wall very early in the travel. With the safety in front of the trigger one never feels any type of heavy resistance till the trigger moves all the way back to the break point.
FYI, I've talked to several people who carry the Taurus without the safety engaged at all. The reality is that the Taurus acts like most, so called, DAO striker guns when carried this way....with more take-up required than most. When carried with this way, it is no less safe than those guns.
The lawyers love this stuff. Who is at fault here and by how much? Lawyers for the idiot who violates at least three rules of gun safety when having an accidental discharge will try to put some of the blame on Taurus, for the design, and then will sue Taurus for most of the money because Taurus will have deeper pockets than the idiot who shoots someone or himself.
Here are the rules of gun safety you would have to violate to have an accidental discharge from this.
1. Finger on trigger when one shouldn't (when engaging safety.)
2. Gun pointed at something not willing to destroy.
3. Finger on trigger when not ready to fire.
Then there are some other possible ones like....
1. Assuming a gun is always loaded.
2. Never trusting a safety or any mechanical device.
3. Know your target and what is behind your target (always point a gun in a "safe" direction.)
I appreciate your wanting to deliver the message to people, that the Taurus safety can be engaged in front of the trigger, but I think the message could be delivered in a less inflammatory manner.
At the risk of giving more ammunition to lawyers, one could point out a defect with most semi-autos. If you have your finger on the trigger and pull back the slide and let it loose the gun could discharge!!!
The only real safety is between a person's ears. Anyone who has an accidental discharge because of the design of the Taurus safety should not own a gun.
Like you state in your video, keep your finger off the trigger! To cause the "defect" occur in normal use, I cannot imagine a responsible gun handler who is setting up for condition 1, EVER putting their finger in the trigger guard, much less on the trigger prior to engaging the safety, that is tantamount to asking for an accidental discharge to occur. When you chamber a round, as you point out, keep your flippin' finger out of the trigger guard.
One thing, if it ever happens it will probably be clear what caused it, the safety lever will be broken.
plastic guns, gotta figure.
I agree with the first part. It would be similar to the parking break engaging while a car is moving. The parking break would either shear off or round off a bit. The Taurus safety would quite likely shear or bend when the gun discharges because it also blocks slide movement.
As for the second part, not sure what plastic has to do with it. The parts involved are all metal.
By the way, this points out another thing that people could describe as "defective" about the Taurus safety. The safety must be disengaged to unload the gun. This exact argument was used to sue Jennings when a 7 year old boy shot and killed another boy, despite the fact he should never had access the gun and he violated many rules of gun safety. Heck he could have killed the other kid with lots of dangerous adult things he shouldn't have had access too, yet the lawyers successfully used the safety design to win a big lawsuit against Jennings. FYI, Jennings and Taurus aren't the only guns that have safeties that can't be engaged when the gun is loaded or unloaded.
I can't believe you guys would make excuses for this obvious engineering flaw.
Taurus needs to fix this, ASAP.
I still cant get my 3rd gen 9mm to do it , the trigger moves but it wont fire.
My comment about plastic guns goes to that, they are almost all very late generation. The days of designers like John Browning and Georg Luger are long gone. The days of machined steel all over the gun are gone gone gone. It's injected, cast, well, it's done very fast, doesn't involve skilled labor, and the bottom line is $$$$. It's sad. Now someone will explain to an old machinist how much better the guns are now.
Some Taurus handguns are DAO or DA\SA and can be carried with the safety off. Mine is a PT145 which is SA/DA it is always in single action like a 1911. The only time it reverts to DA is if you get a ftf than the DA pull will allow a second strike. Like a 1911 I wouldn't carry it without the safety engaged.
Leave the poor man alone for goodness sake! Yes it's a situation that should never happen, but this is reality we live in folks. If something CAN happen...it usually will. think about all the times you've bought say, a bottle of aspirin that has one of those littel plastic thingamabobs in it that' supposed to be for freshness or something...they always say right across it "SO NOT SWALLOW." Sure, it would either take:1. an idiot of epic proportion or 2. someone with a serious lack of attention to what he/she was doing, but truth be known...somewhere it probably HAS happened. that video might be seen by just the right idiot or careless individual, and it might just stick in thier head enough to save someone's life.
I need to make a video about the design flaws of my glock. I mean, if I pull the trigger it goes off, even if I dont want to shoot what its pointed at. Can you believe that? They should quit making this gun altogether.
That was exactly the gun I was talking about that people don't use the safety on. It is no less safe than a Glock or S&W M&P or XP which have no safety and, in reality are closer to SA guns, than they are to DA. The Taurus has the added advantage, over some of these guns, of a long takeup, which makes it even "safer" for want of a better description.
I agree with you, it is a design flaw. As you correctly pointed out, keeping your finger off of the trigger is the basic safety, but Taurus needs to fix this. I am not a Taurus basher, I currently don't own any Taurus's, but my first handgun was a Taurus, was it perfect, no. But it worked every time I pulled the trigger and it was affordable. Would a person ever intentionally do it, I doubt it, but it could happen in a stressful situation. So it is a flaw.
Thank You for your efforts, I appreciate it.
One minor difference. The Glock is designed to fire when the trigger is pulled. I highly suspect the failure of the Taurus safety isn't a design feature.
Disaster - I am not sure I understand how this can be described as safe no matter what the takeup of the trigger. The user of the gun is under the impression that the gun is in safe mode. However, it is clear in the video, that the trigger can be pulled which will result in a round being fired even though the saftey is engaged.
Granted, a lot would have to go wrong and the user would, as you already stated, violate almost all gun rules in order for this to occur. However, the fact is that the gun will fire a round when the saftey is enganged. How can that not be a flaw?
Not sure how someone can compare their Glock to this scenario. Apples and oranges.
Actually with all due respect I believe that is false. I am not an expert. A little research on Glocks and most striker fired pistols show the striker is in a forward position resting against a block and does not travel rearward until the trigger is pulled. The Taurus SA/DA is truly SA as the striker is always in the "cocked" rearward position unless a failure to fire occurs. The Taurus like a Glock does have a block that doesn't drop out of the way until the trigger is fully pulled. Glocks and most others would be considered DAO or DA/SA.
I'm no expert, but I believe that if you follow gun safety and apply the safety without your finger holding the trigger back the taurus works as designed. NO amount of manual safeties can make up for a lack of mental safety and a disregard of the four rules of gun safety.
No, that isn't really true. The Glock is the closest to a double action pull with it's "safe action" that does move the striker back but it still isn't even clear that it's striker, if directly dropped from it's "cocked" resting position wouldn't activate some primers. The other guns, the XP and the M&P move the striker a miniscule amount backwards...no more than many SA guns move a hammer back when the trigger is pulled. They, in no way could be considered as safe as a real DA action which raises the hammer completely from rest and drops it.
The main reason these guns like to be thought of as DAO is because police forces and ignorant owners, are willing to carry a DAO gun without a safety, but not an SA gun.
A good example of an SA gun, that has more rearward hammer movement, in SA mode, is the CZ40B. The CZ40B, in SA mode, moves the hammer backwards farther, and has a higher stock SA pull than the S&W M&P.
I do think a safety is a good idea on an SA gun that has very little trigger travel and a low trigger effort, such as a 1911. However, if one considers the 5lb trigger effort of the S&W M&P, and it's short trigger travel, to be a sufficient safety, than one must conclude that the 5lb travel and considerably longer trigger travel of the Taurus Millenium is also safe.
This video is much more likely to help a lawyer sue Taurus than help prevent an idiot from shooting himself with the gun.
A person would much better be served by watching this video on gun safety.
Thanks Chipperi. I haven't watched the video because I am here at work, but I own and carry a Taurus PT145 with the safty flaw. In my opion it is a design flaw. In my opinion Taurus makes every owner who reads the manual aware of the flaw by their statements in their users manual. I would never feel comfortable selling this gun to another person unless I showed them this design flaw first.
In my opinion, any gun that will fire from the action of pulling the trigger with the safety engaged, regardless of how that safety got engaged, is flawed. It's just something that I am aware of, and I think every owner of this gun should be aware of, and I carry it anyway.
Has Taurus left themselves open to a lawsuit because of this, absolutely. I am surprised they haven't fixed it.
Just for a laugh the manual also says
the very next line reads
Well come on guys which is it?
But my personal favorite is:
I fail to understand why anyone would attempt to engage a safety while holding the trigger back. To "find" this "flaw" you needed to be doing something inherently unsafe to begin with (something like pointing the gun at your own head as you do in the video and having your booger hook on the trigger when not ready to shoot).
First two rules of gun safety:
1) ALWAYS keep the gun pointed in a safe direction
2) ALWAYS keep your booger hook off the trigger until ready to shoot.
Read those enough times they begin to sink in.
You people are missing the basic point.
The Taurus polymer handgun designs affected can be put on safe, and fired while the safety is still engaged. Everything else is irrelevant-the gun will fire while on safe. This is completely, totally, wildly unacceptable in any firearm design.
Only if you ignore the rules of safe firearm handling while engaging the safety, and then pull the trigger afterwards.
It would be different if the gun fired DUE to the safety being engaged. But this is like lambasting an automaker because their vehicle "can be shifted into drive with only a light amount of pressure on the brake pedal", and will go forward if you then depress the accelerator, even if the parking brake is set. Duh.
I don't particularly care for Taurus, but I will defend them on this one. The gun is perfetly safe when properly handled.
If you pull the trigger on a gun, expect it to fire. That's what it was designed to do.
Separate names with a comma.