to Eddie NFL, reread my post, I didn't state that the gun discharge because the safety slipped off, I said the safety slipped off with out the carriers knowledge. The gun went bang because the individual had a 1 1/2 trigger pull and somehow while pulling it out of a IWB holster, his hand around the grip, the trigger was jiggled, the gun discharged. Went through the top of his thigh, exited the top of his inter leg, severing a artery. He was a reserve police officer in a very small lower SW Michigan township. To be honest, people didn't like to be around him because of his cowboy attitude, but still his family mourned him. It was not a happy time.
lowering hammers
- Thread starter senior
- Start date
- Status
SharpsDressedMan
member
As Elmer Fudd says, "Be Vaawy, vaawy afwaid!!!!"
aka108
Member
The simplest and least problematic decocker on a SA is probably on the Star M30. It is all in the slide and it simply retacts the firing pin to a point where it will not make contact with the hammer. As much as I trust it, I still don't. I still drop the mag and pull the slide back and take a good look inside.
cock and locked
As I read, I realize, this debate over yea or nay of lowering the hammer on a live rd is one that will never end! I started the thread to gain a true reason for NOT lowering on a 1911 with a rd, and at its close I still question the nay reasoning of it. I have a Colt Defender, and t o this day see no danger in carrying in condition 2 as the 80 and 90 series have the safety that covers the pin after decocking. I dont carry the gun in condition 1 or 2, always in 3, and perhaps i'm just dense, but still do not see the harm, if using care, in lowering on live rd and carrying in 2. I know there had to have many many cases of someone with condition 1 having to lower the hammer with out dropping the mag and retacting the slide to check its safety!
As I read, I realize, this debate over yea or nay of lowering the hammer on a live rd is one that will never end! I started the thread to gain a true reason for NOT lowering on a 1911 with a rd, and at its close I still question the nay reasoning of it. I have a Colt Defender, and t o this day see no danger in carrying in condition 2 as the 80 and 90 series have the safety that covers the pin after decocking. I dont carry the gun in condition 1 or 2, always in 3, and perhaps i'm just dense, but still do not see the harm, if using care, in lowering on live rd and carrying in 2. I know there had to have many many cases of someone with condition 1 having to lower the hammer with out dropping the mag and retacting the slide to check its safety!
Last edited:
TenDriver
Member
You guys are right on all three.
1. No one was hurt. BAD typo!
2. My mother in law IS visiting.
3. It was a negligent discharge. I wouldn't attempt to call it anything else. I'd add the word "stupid" to it quite honestly.
The CCW question, I don't carry all that much, and when I do I chamber one or carry one of my revolvers. To me the best defense is situational awareness and familiar surroundings. When I can't guarantee both, I carry.
1. No one was hurt. BAD typo!
2. My mother in law IS visiting.
3. It was a negligent discharge. I wouldn't attempt to call it anything else. I'd add the word "stupid" to it quite honestly.
The CCW question, I don't carry all that much, and when I do I chamber one or carry one of my revolvers. To me the best defense is situational awareness and familiar surroundings. When I can't guarantee both, I carry.
Just to clear up how a 1911-style pistol operates, this is not a danger of this with a non-firing pin safety type, either. The inertial design prevents the firing pin from going forward if the hammer is struck while in the lowered position. The force of the blow is transmitted to the slide via the firing pin stop, not to the firing pin. You can't discharge the gun in condition 2 from a strike to the hammer or by dropping it on the hammer when down. This is one of the virtues of that mode of carry.
I know this will start a flaming thread from 1911 lovers but if you're in doubt then carry something striker fired or with a decocker. This is why I sold my 1991A1. That, and only old farts carry 1911's 
Seriously though, I learned after buying my Taurus 709 "Slim" that it's technically SA, so I am carrying cocked and locked (kind of) anyway. At least there's a FP block.
Seriously though, I learned after buying my Taurus 709 "Slim" that it's technically SA, so I am carrying cocked and locked (kind of) anyway. At least there's a FP block.
earlthegoat2
Member
Im not going to be decocking this one or cocking it for that matter since it is now DAO. (Model 60)
Though this one still has its single action notch, I am not going to cock it ever. (Model 38)
But if I WILL have to one day I know for a fact that this one is the least safe to decock because I cannot put my thumb under the hammer. So I will never put myself in that position so I will not cock it.
Maybe, just maybe I will cock this one. (Model 15)
If that is the case then I can just follow these simple instructions that can be adapted to work for the 1911 as well.
Standard and very simple decocking method for revolvers paraphrased from Ed Lovette's wonderful book The Snubby Revolver:
Place weak hand thumb between the hammer and frame with the thumb fully engaging the hammer. (physically blocking the hammer from falling)
Pull the trigger and let hammer move forward a little and then take finger off trigger.
Use the strong hand thumb and place it on the hammer spur and remove weak hand thumb from under hammer.
Ease hammer forward with strong hand thumb.
Yayyyy decocked.
Note: Works better on revolvers with hammer mounted firing pins.
earlthegoat2
Member
I guess you should look closer at the Model 15 then too.
If the 38 is a garden implement then the 15 was a lowly yard implement.
CajunBass
Member
I learned to decock a revolver back when I was shooting cap guns. My first shotgun was an exposed hammer shotgun. You had to lower the hammer to decock it. Never have too? You've never changed your mind about shooting? I have. Get lined up on a squirrel and he jumps just before you pull the trigger. What are you going to do? Shoot anyway? Seems sort of silly to me.
I'll admit that I can't think of any reason myself to decock a 1911, but I can do it. I never had a problem learning how and never thought of it as particularly dangerous. Now, my CZ-82, if you want to carry it D/A with a chambered round, you HAVE to lower the hammer manually. Same process as doing it with a 1911 really.
Seems sort of silly to me.I'll admit that I can't think of any reason myself to decock a 1911, but I can do it. I never had a problem learning how and never thought of it as particularly dangerous. Now, my CZ-82, if you want to carry it D/A with a chambered round, you HAVE to lower the hammer manually. Same process as doing it with a 1911 really.
Enough people have been shot when lowering the hammer that Ruger had to redesign the lockworks on the Blackhawks so when the loading port is open, you cannot cock the hammer. And the revolver has a transfer bar.
Marlin put a cross bolt safety on their lever actions, which is an improvement.
And way back when, the P38 came with a safety that decocked the pistol.
On the P5 product improvement of the P38, the Germans did away with the safety. It has a decocker. You either carry it cocked and unlocked (even the very stupid can recognize that as a bad idea), or you decock it.
All to keep people from shooting themselves or others, when lowering the hammer.
Autolycus
Member
I still don't understand the point of lowering a hammer on a loaded 1911 pistol. Some people have said when certain circumstances arise, what are those circumstances? Why not just put the safety on?
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
Oh, Lord. Not this again...
Hammers are designed to be manually operated with the thumb...cocked and decocked. That's why they have serrations or checkering on them. Care must be used if one is to avoid discharging the weapon while doing it. Lowering a hammer isn't normally something that is done in a hurry, so there really is no excuse for not being careful.
Lowering the hammer on a 1911 one-handed is easy and safe if you know how, unless you have very small hands. If you do, it's adviseable to use both hands.
Condition Two offers the advantage of better keeping dirt and debris out of the lockwork under adverse conditions while still providing the option of readying the gun with one hand.
The 1911 was not designed to be carried cocked and locked. It was designed so that it could be safely carried in that condition...but not specifically to be carried in that condition.
It was also designed to be safely carried in Condition Two, and on half-cock. Yes. The half-cock is a legitimate safety position. It's described in the patents...as well as the proper method of lowering the hammer one-handed. Look it up.
In 1910...during the trials...The thumb safety was added on request of the U.S. Cavalry so that the cocked gun could be placed on-safe and reholstered in order to let the mounted trooper regain control of an unruly horse...not so that it could be carried in Condition One.
Browning had no intent on the carry condition. His intent was to give the U.S.Army a pistol designed to their specifications. They asked for a grip safety and they got one. They later asked for a slide-locking manual safety, and they got that, too.
Hammers are designed to be manually operated with the thumb...cocked and decocked. That's why they have serrations or checkering on them. Care must be used if one is to avoid discharging the weapon while doing it. Lowering a hammer isn't normally something that is done in a hurry, so there really is no excuse for not being careful.
Lowering the hammer on a 1911 one-handed is easy and safe if you know how, unless you have very small hands. If you do, it's adviseable to use both hands.
Condition Two offers the advantage of better keeping dirt and debris out of the lockwork under adverse conditions while still providing the option of readying the gun with one hand.
The 1911 was not designed to be carried cocked and locked. It was designed so that it could be safely carried in that condition...but not specifically to be carried in that condition.
It was also designed to be safely carried in Condition Two, and on half-cock. Yes. The half-cock is a legitimate safety position. It's described in the patents...as well as the proper method of lowering the hammer one-handed. Look it up.
In 1910...during the trials...The thumb safety was added on request of the U.S. Cavalry so that the cocked gun could be placed on-safe and reholstered in order to let the mounted trooper regain control of an unruly horse...not so that it could be carried in Condition One.
Browning had no intent on the carry condition. His intent was to give the U.S.Army a pistol designed to their specifications. They asked for a grip safety and they got one. They later asked for a slide-locking manual safety, and they got that, too.
Magnumite
Member
Tuner, interesting statement. Did you read the copy of the patent? Or is this a historical reference from research? Curious about this. Time sometimes distances the perspective of intent and design. Sounds like a way to put alot of the intent debate to rest.
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
Some of it comes from the patents, and some comes from historical research. The part about "Browning's Intent" is easy. The first ones...eight pistols...that he submitted for testing in 1910 didn't have thumb safeties. So, how could he have intended it to be carried cocked and locked if the original examples didn't even have the ability to be locked?
The submissions were subsequently returned with the cavalry's request. Of the eight...six were refitted with the slide-locking manual safeties and resubmitted. They were accepted and the design finalized.
Pictured below is one of two of the original pistols that still exist before the thumb safety was added.
Photo courtesy of Charles Clawson.
The submissions were subsequently returned with the cavalry's request. Of the eight...six were refitted with the slide-locking manual safeties and resubmitted. They were accepted and the design finalized.
Pictured below is one of two of the original pistols that still exist before the thumb safety was added.
Photo courtesy of Charles Clawson.
carry
For once now i can agree, THANK YOU tunner 1911, always thought before there was to much, "he said, they said" about how the design was meant by Mr. Browning. I had seen many times the pics of the original design WITHOUT the thumb safety, and how it was later added as u stated and why it was done. For me, CASE CLOSED, thank you again sir!
For once now i can agree, THANK YOU tunner 1911, always thought before there was to much, "he said, they said" about how the design was meant by Mr. Browning. I had seen many times the pics of the original design WITHOUT the thumb safety, and how it was later added as u stated and why it was done. For me, CASE CLOSED, thank you again sir!
1911Tuner
Moderator Emeritus
Way yonder too much.
Browning didn't design the gun all by himself. He had the Army Ordnance Board guiding and directing him, and with the aid of a team of Colt's top engineers. It was an assignment, and nothing more. His job was to give them what he was asked for.
They asked for a grip safety...which was in place in 1908 and 1909 on the Colt military contract pistols...and he gave'em one. Then, they asked for a slide locking manual safety...and he gave'em that, too.
That's right, kids. The 1911 was designed by a committee.
Incidentally, the grip safety wasn't Browning's idea, either. The U.S. Army saw it on the Luger Model 1903, and asked Colt for one on the contract pistols.
Neither did Browning have much to do with the final design of the P35/ High-Power. He died 9 years before it was finished, and his early prototypes didn't look anything like the finished product. Like the 1911, it was designed on request for a military entity. If that entity had asked for a grip safety, the Browning High-Power would be wearing one today.
nearlynormalmike
Member
I'll be danged, I think I might have learned something new although I hate to admit it.
I have read many many articles/forum discussions and this is the very first where anyone recommended cond. 2 carry. I was taught and have always believed that cond. 1 is the ONLY way to carry.
I have been told on multiple occasions by multiple knowledgeable shooters, that if you aren't going to carry a 1911 in # 1, then don't carry one at all. It is the only way I have ever carried a 1911.
I will have to think this out some more. It still seems to me #1 is safer and quicker if you have actually draw to fire. If it unsafe to carefully lower the hammer in a non-stressful controlled situation, then it would be much less safe to try and manipulate the hammer in highly stressful uncontrolled circumstances (if the safety mechanism won't block the hammer when your thumb slips off when decocking, it won't block it when recocking).
Of course in the latter situation you may intend to shoot, although not necessarily. You might find yourself shooting something unintended, single action Western style!
Awaiting further review and thoughts on the subject I think I will continue carrying cond. #1. I always strive to be objective and ready to learn however,
especially so if it is safety related
I have read many many articles/forum discussions and this is the very first where anyone recommended cond. 2 carry. I was taught and have always believed that cond. 1 is the ONLY way to carry.
I have been told on multiple occasions by multiple knowledgeable shooters, that if you aren't going to carry a 1911 in # 1, then don't carry one at all. It is the only way I have ever carried a 1911.
I will have to think this out some more. It still seems to me #1 is safer and quicker if you have actually draw to fire. If it unsafe to carefully lower the hammer in a non-stressful controlled situation, then it would be much less safe to try and manipulate the hammer in highly stressful uncontrolled circumstances (if the safety mechanism won't block the hammer when your thumb slips off when decocking, it won't block it when recocking).
Of course in the latter situation you may intend to shoot, although not necessarily. You might find yourself shooting something unintended, single action Western style!
Awaiting further review and thoughts on the subject I think I will continue carrying cond. #1. I always strive to be objective and ready to learn however,
especially so if it is safety related
Old Shooter
Member
TenDriver, were your wife and mother-in-law both present when you had that ND?
If so, that must have been the perfect storm, I would have loved to have been a mouse in the corner listening to the conversations!
If so, that must have been the perfect storm, I would have loved to have been a mouse in the corner listening to the conversations!
Magnumite
Member
Thank you, Tuner
The gun went bang becuase your friend was negligent. Either he tripped, or if it discharged because the trigger was "jiggled," he fubared the gun.
- Status
