ClickClickD'oh said:
I think what we have here is a case of you getting way too analytically on what I was saying.
There's no dispute that decocking levers are in point of fact levers. I was commenting on how the levers are operated. Or, in pictures:
Too analytical? Perhaps, but I was simply trying to address
YOUR assertion that:
"...the Sig decocker doesn't really have the same action as the Ruger. The Sig is more of a straight down press where as the Ruger is a rotation."
You took a bit of artistic license when you drew your arrows. While to you the SIG decocker seems to move differently, in more of a straight-down direction, the SIG decocker tab also travels downward in an arc just like the others --
it just doesn't travel as far. It is a good approach. (The curve of it's arc can be seen in the raised metal on the grip frame in your photo.)
You were complaining that CZ changed their method -- and I didn't understand why the new method was a problem -- as the new CZ approach was also seen in other widely used weapons.
On the plus side, the newer Omega design, seen in the CZ P-07/P-09, seems to be relatively unique in offering a user-changeable decocker or safety. (There may be other gun makers who offer that capability, but I can't think of any at the moment.) I suspect CZ will continue to offer their current (75-based) design for years to come, but I won't be surprised to see most of the future CZ guns using the Omega system.
I also expect to see a new striker-fired CZ design, one of these days. If SIG can overcome it's prejudices and do that, I suspect CZ can, too. Just changing to the Omega system was a pretty big move for CZ, as was embracing polymer.