How dangerous is a chambered Kahr to a gun with safety? CCW.

[franco45]

Not at all, franco. Not even close. I freely acknowledge that many people who disagree with me on this point are ND-free. My point was solely that, when the poll results come back that 50 THR'ers carry a no-safety gun and haven't had an ND, that's not very good evidence that there aren't NDs with no-safety guns. It would merely reflect selection bias in the sample.

Dave, the same argument could be used against you. Instead I would argue that there are more ND's with guns that have external safeties than with guns with "no external" safeties. Is it on? Is it off? Be wrong one time and you will either have a ND or be unable to fire as needed. With all 3 of my Kahr handguns I always know what condition they are in, loaded with one in the pipe.

What it boils down to is make the choice that you feel comfortable with and then practice, practice, practice.

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

Same is true with cars. But there are many accidents every day. We don't say "my driving skills are my seat belt" and rip those out of cars, do we?

The seat belt and other safety equipment in your car, excluding error on your part, are for factors beyond your control. Pulling the trigger of a gun is 100% under your control.

 

[ATLDave]

franco45, I feel like you're kind of skipping around on me. I take it we're past your objection to my objection to a poll as evidence-of-absence, and are arguing against the larger proposition that safeties decrease the likelihood of an ND.

I generally think that's a pretty difficult position to defend. The case for external safeties is this:

It takes two mistakes (disengaging the safety and pulling the trigger) to cause an ND of a gun with an external safety. For a gun with no external safety, it only takes one (pulling the trigger).​

"Not knowing" the condition/status of the safety does not reduce the number of errors to cause an ND with a safety-having gun. To the contrary, it is its own mistake (assuming the gun to be safed when it is not). Maybe you are suggesting that having a safety will cause users to trust the safety and carelessly place their finger on the trigger when they wouldn't with a no-safety gun. Well, that would also be an independent mistake, and I'm unaware of any evidence that this is what people do in real life.

To be clear, I'm not arguing that ND's are impossible with safetied guns. They are. But it takes an additional mistake to make a surpise bang with such a gun versus one without a safety. Everyone has to make their own decision about whether they want to remove that extra layer of mistake-insurance. My point is merely that someone who concludes they really want that extra layer of safety is hardly being irrational.

 

[ATLDave]

The seat belt and other safety equipment in your car, excluding error on your part, are for factors beyond your control. Pulling the trigger of a gun is 100% under your control.

But the safety belt, air bags, etc., don't exclude user error. They work even if I drive the car off the road all on my own. I don't plan to drive off the road, but why wouldn't I want a layer of safety to help me survive that kind of mistake if I ever make it?

I have never met a perfect human. Every system with a human in the loop is going to have error rates. That is a fact, jack. One can decide to risk the mistake, or one can buy an extra layer of safety.

 

[franco45]

What a waste of bandwidth. Just keep your finger off the trigger of any gun until you plan to shoot it. Is that so very hard to understand that it needs to be debated ad nauseam?

It really is that simple isn't it. I wouldn't say this is a waste of bandwidth though. I've enjoyed the thread.

 

[The_Armed_Therapist]

I would hypothesize that more accidental discharges and shooting accidents in general happen with guns that have safeties... either guns where it was mistakenly believed that the safety was on, or the safety didn't do its job.

 

[franco45]

franco45, I feel like you're kind of skipping around on me. I take it we're past your objection to my objection to a poll as evidence-of-absence, and are arguing against the larger proposition that safeties decrease the likelihood of an ND.

Dave, I think your objection to a poll as evidence of absence is a straw man. There are obviously ND's with guns with and without external manual safeties. That is a given. I think that the larger issue is whether or not safeties decrease the likelihood of discharge.

I would hypothesize that more accidental discharges and shooting accidents in general happen with guns that have safeties... either guns where it was mistakenly believed that the safety was on, or the safety didn't do its job.

I agree with this hypothesis. It appears you don't. Cest La Vie

 

[Orion8472]

I am going to go to a local range that rents guns and will rent a CW9 tomorrow. I'm interested in seeing how it handles.

 

[hammerclaw56]

Kahr pm9 DLC

I carry a pm9 every day in my front pocket in a galco pocket holster and feel 100% safe .The trigger is covered and it will not fire unless taken out of the holster and the trigger pulled. End of story

 

[heeler]

Last week I was watching a friends six month old Malonois for a few days and he has discovered his tail.
He chases it constantly.
This is no joke.
One of those days last week my brother came by to get some tools and I just happened to be cleaning my Kahr PM9,which is one of my daily carry's,and yes, with one in the pipe.
My other daily carry is an LCP,and yes,with one in the pipe.
After reassembling it he asked to hold it.
He asked me where the safety was.
When I replied it did not have one he was highly opinionated about such a lack of basic safety and so on.
I got up and brought two unloaded revolvers from the safe and placed them on the table and asked him if he could carry any of the three which would be his choice?
He immediately pointed to the S&W Model 37 Air Weight.
Why that one I asked?
His reply was that it was smaller,more reliable,and safer to carry.
I then pointed out to him none of the three guns on the table had safeties.
I could tell that point of fact made him think more and react less.
My friend picked up his Malonois on Sunday and he was still chasing his tail the day he picked him up and my friend told me he's trying to break Eclipse(dogs name) from what he considers an annoying habit.
True story.

 

[TonyT]

For carry purposes I use a gun without aby extrenal hammer or safeties - in a self defense situation I do not want anyhthing to snag. I also carry the gun fully loaded - a Kahr PM-9 with one in the chamber.

 

[Orion8472]

Well, I tested out the CW9 at the gun store [with rentals]. Very nice!! Yes, the trigger is a longer pull than I'm used to, but after about three magazines worth, I know that with practice, I could become much more proficient with that platform. It was lighter in recoil than my EMP, less muzzle flip, lighter, thinner, . . . that will be the carry gun I go with as soon as the EMP sells.

This has been a great thread and I appreciate all the thought provoking posts.

 

[Ben86]

I'm glad you got to try it out before you bought one. I see you came to the same conclusion about the gun I did. I hope your future CW9 serves you well.

 

[Orion8472]

Thanks, Ben. I hope it does as well. Just have to get some stuff sold before I can get it.

Well, I CAN get one now, but would rather have the money from something sold first.

 

[trex1310]

All these guns have safeties of one type or another. Most people don't
have the wherewithall to read the maual and follow the instructions.
They would rather shoot themselves or someone else by not keeping
their finger out of the trigger guard.

 

[KAS1981]

My brother purchased a Smith & Wesson SD40 a while back. He was pretty excited.

After checking out the gun for a little bit, he says to me, "they only thing about is....well.....where's the safety?"

I field stripped it and showed him how a firing pin block mechanism works, after that he was OK with it.

A lot of folks don't know what a firing pin block is. Even folks that have been around firearms throughout their lives, that includes me up until about year and a half ago. Granted, it's another mechanical device that CAN fail, but it IS a safety nonetheless.

 

[jeepmor]

Kahr triggers are the best DAO triggers I've used. Long, but light and smooth. My Kahr CW45 is a dream to shoot, but the grip is thin to me as I'm used to a double stack 45 in the same CCW format, and I have big hands.

I'm not ditching my Kahr though, it's great, just not my go to gun yet.

 

[The_Armed_Therapist]

I agree with this hypothesis. It appears you don't. Cest La Vie

I'm confused... Were you saying that I don't agree with what I said? Or were you talking to Dave?

 

[OlympicFox]

It is difficult for me to see how one could pull the trigger of a Kahr any way other than purposely.

I have to agree with this one.

IMO, the trigger on a Kahr is just like that of a really good revolver - it's long and takes some effort. The end result is a trigger that's both very easy to use in the field and very difficult to use accidentally.

OTOH, the triggers on the typical "safe action" pistol are too short to be truly safe IMHO. They may have the same trigger weight as a Kahr, but the length of the pull is so short that it's all too easy to pull the trigger prematurely in a self-defense situation.

It's easy to say that you should keep your finger off the trigger until you're ready to shoot, but there is that situation where you're facing an armed bad guy but you want to give him a chance to back off first before pulling the trigger. In that situation, your finger is on the trigger waiting for the final decision. I've been there and I'm glad that the gun didn't have a short/light trigger because the bad guy did have a change of heart & I was able to stand down without pulling the trigger even though my finger was definitely in the ready position.

My first carry gun was an M&P 9c with a 'safe action' trigger. Nice gun, but it only took me a couple of trips to the range to realize the trigger was too short and easy to fire in that kind of situation where I'm ready to shoot but . . . oops. So, I traded it for a Sig. Loved the Sig, but that first DA shot was always low & left so . . . I bought a Kahr K9 for carry. Then the wife bought a CM9. I didn't take long to realize that the 19 ounce CM9 was a lot more comfortable to carry than the 30 ounce K9, so I got a PM40 for myself.

One of the things I really like about the Kahr's is that I can draw quickly, laser the target with my finger on the trigger, staged and ready to fire BUT not fire because of the long trigger pull. Hopefully, I'll never be in a situation again where I need to point my gun at someone, but if it does happen I want a gun in my hand that doesn't lend itself to going bang without that long & deliberate trigger pull.

This doesn't mean that I don't occasionally carry something else. Sometimes, it's one of our Sigs, or a 1911 or the little J-frame 357. Several thousand rounds of practice has mostly cured that DA first shot problem with the Sigs, but the safety on the 1911 still takes some thought. Not much but some. Sure, autopilot gets the safety off most of the time, but every once in a while the autopilot is out to lunch. That's embarrassing in a match, but deadly on the streets.

 

[Orion8472]

Good post, OlympicFox. This is kinda where I'm at now. And there is something to be said about the "giving the bad guy a chance to back down". In such a situation, I can see how a person's muscle control COULD be affected by the tense situation and [with a short light trigger] accidently let one fly. I will be getting a CW9 soon. MAYBE the CM9 if I got a pinky finger extension for the magazines.

 

[OlympicFox]

Hmmm, CM9 vs. CW9 vs. PM9.

Personally, I prefer the PM9, but then I also prefer my defensive guns in black with night sights. I guess, I'm also a bit of a snob because I like the finish of the PM series over the CW series.

As for the CW vs. CM?

My parameters for a carry gun are:

1. Absolutely reliable with the ammunition used. I really don't care if it's unreliable with other ammo as long as it is absolutely, positively reliable with two top notch rounds.
2. The largest caliber I'm comfortable with carrying. Frankly, in my case that's a moving target. Most days, it's the Kahr PM40, the other days might be the Kahr K9, or the Sig P238 - all with lasers.
3. The smallest and lightest gun available in that caliber.
4. A long & silky smooth DA trigger.
5. The simplest possible battery of arms
6. The highest quality I can afford - or my wife will let me have.

Rule #1. A no-brainer. Well, some folks want their guns to run any ammo. Why, I don't really know. For example, my PM40 is a fussy eater, just like my granddaughter, but it just loves Cor-Bon 135gr JHP and Hornady FTX Critical Defense. Next week it will get tested on Winchester Ranger-T as a possible third choice. Don't really need anything else. BTW, I also chrono everything I shoot. Some ammo doesn't perform as advertised - I've found some +P that actually runs slower than standard load stuff of the same brand and weight. Go figure. I'm not likely to carry Ammo R that chrono's at 1050 fps when Ammo C chrono's at 1240 fps.

Rule #2. You may have noticed that Rule #2 doesn't include a 45. Well, after months and months of deliberation, I finally took care of that this afternoon and ordered a Dan Wesson CCO Bobtail. Yeah, the 1911 breaks two rules, but it's just not possible to be a genuine gun nut without a good 1911 carry gun & this one is the real McCoy. Besides, the Sig P238 already broke the same rules and it's a favorite of mine, especially when loaded with +P 90 gr Buffalo Bore running at close to 1200 fps.

Rule #3. This answers the CW vs. CM question and explains why my wife has a CM9 instead of a CW9 & my PM40 instead of a K40 or Sig P229. When we shoot for fun & games, we shoot a larger & heavier gun, like the Sig P226 Elite Stainless. We practice regularly with the carry guns, but not for the fun of it - the exception being the Kahr K9 loaded with competition ammo.

Rule #4. Our primary carry guns are the three Kahr's and a J-frame - all with exceptionally nice DA triggers. There are two exceptions; the 1911 and the Sig P238. They are just too nice to not have, but they will never be our primary carry guns.

Rule #5. No manual safety needed. Maybe someday I'll get a Para LDA?

Rule #6. Self explanatory. But, some people don't subscribe to it. A friend of mine always buys the bargain brands, the clones of the real deal, etc. You'd recognize him as the one that usually has to rack his slide at least once or twice during a match. Then there is the issue that I haven't told the wife yet about the new Dan Wesson.


The bottom line? I have rather clear ideas on what the ideal carry gun is, and in spite of that I've found that it varies according to the situation, the weather, as well as my mood. Seems a bit silly carrying a big 1911 around the house on a warm summer day, so the little Sig P238 in a pocket holster is great. OTOH, the same little Sig seems inadequate when I'm out & about in the winter and everyone is bundled up with several layers to stay warm - a good time to have a 40 or 45. But, some days, I'm just not in the mood to carry two pounds of steel and lead, other days I love the feel of it. Choices are good.

 

[m2steven]

I won't be macho here. Any pistol without a safety is more dangerous than a pistol with one if you pull the trigger when you don't need nor want to, if you can't get your weapon out of your pocket/holster without grabbing teh trigger, etc. A safety is a great thing. If you don't have a pistol with a safety, you are subject to the rule of never making a mistake, or making a huge one.

 

[IMTHDUKE]

Interesting how that there are those that say, " I would not carry a SA cocked and locked with one in the pipe". But it has a safety.

Then those who say, " I would not carry a DA, without a safety".

So here is your solution....a gun with one in the pipe, uncocked till deployed and without a safety.

 

[OlympicFox]

Wouldn't it be nice if a manual safety actually did make gun safer? Unfortunately, it doesn't. The problem isn't so much that the safety itself is defective - although that is a real possibility. Many guns will, such as a Taurus I have, that will fire even though the safety is on. All one has to do is pull the trigger a bit harder and bang.

The bigger problems are:

1. Human nature is what it is. We make assumptions. Like if the gun has a safety, then it must be safer. Right? A little carelessness or neglect to ensure the safety is on and bang. It's the same deal as the guns that fire when folks thought they were unloaded - but failed to actually check.

2. Human nature is still what it is. We rely on safety devices and get lazy about our personal responsibility. While you might think you're absolutely positively never going to make that mistake, there is still a good chance that you will.

3. Then there is the distinct possibility that the safety got swept off. This is especially possible for concealed carry. I kinda figure that anyone that can't get their gun out of their holster without risking getting the finger on the trigger isn't assured of getting the gun out of the holster without disengaging the safety either. How easy is it for someone to disengage the safety while deploying the gun from a IWB holster? Easy enough for anyone that hasn't practiced enough to be able to get the gun at the close ready before their finger gets on the trigger. Then there are those ambi safeties. At the end of the day when a friend de-gunned, he discovered his safety had been swept off on his Kimber. Perhaps during one of the times he was getting into his truck and pulling down the tail of his jacket? Or the guy I know that shot his partner when reholstering his 1911; forgot to put the safety back on. Oops.

4. Lastly, there is the 'safety issue' of having manual safety on a defensive handgun that must be disengaged before the user can successfully deploy the gun. It's no secret that the brain turns to mush when the SHTF. How easy is it to forget to flick off the safety when you are facing a bad guy with a gun and you're trying to shoot him before he shoots you? Well, if you haven't practiced enough for muscle memory to take over with a 100% money back guarantee, you might have a problem. Hence the fact that 'safety' must include the ability of the user to deploy the gun without forgetting to disengage the retention holster or to disengage the safety.


I was at a gun shop in Sunny CA this spring and the owner was telling me about two local law enforcement agencies that had switched to Glocks the year before. One agency had all the LEOs go through a 40 hour training program with the Glocks and hadn't had any problems. The other agency only had a 3-hour training program for the new gun and had 3 officers shoot themselves in the leg in the first year. A little sloppiness and a presumption about the mechanical safety of the gun make a dangerous combination.

While it is still possible to have an unintentional discharge with any gun, the Beretta's, Sig's and Kahr's with their long & purposeful DA triggers require an equally long and purposeful pull on the trigger before firing. Could be why NYPD requires their Glock be equipped with an 11# trigger, while my Kahr K9 with an NYPD trigger has a 5.6# trigger pull - just half of what they require for a Glock. Why? My hunch is that it's the long pull of the Kahr trigger negates the need for the extra heavy pull on an NYPD Glock.

So, until someone does an extensive study comparing the actual number of unintentional discharges with various trigger & safety designs, the best we can do is take educated guesses. Unfortunately, most folks are a lot better at making assumptions.

For me, that means that I'll carry one of my Kahr's most of the time, and I'll be quite comfortable literally and with my ability to carry and deploy the gun safely. The rest of the time, I'll carry a 1911 and be less comfortable and always just a bit anxious about the manual safety. Is it on? Will I remember to flick it off if I need to?

 

[OlympicFox]

Interesting how that there are those that say, " I would not carry a SA cocked and locked with one in the pipe". But it has a safety.

Then those who say, " I would not carry a DA, without a safety".

So here is your solution....a gun with one in the pipe, uncocked till deployed and without a safety.

Neat gun, but I don't understand how it can prevent someone from pulling the trigger prematurely??? And what if it doesn't work? There are folks out there that carry, carry, carry and virtually never clean their gun. Any complication increases the probability of a malfunction. KISS.