Magazine disconnect vs grip safety, which is dumber?.

[ForumSurfer]

Czar, the beaver tail is just to protect the webbing of your hand from the slide for those of us that shoot with a high grip. If you have large, fat paws a gi spec 1911 with a spurred hammer will pinch you pretty good.

As others have said, there really is no point in decocking a 1911. You can't engage the safety and the firing pin is no longer blocked on most models when the hammer isn't cocked. That cocked hammer is safer, some people just don't like the looks of the hammer back for whatever reason.

 

[waktasz]

I don't like mag disconnects, but if I was open carrying in a duty type situation I think I might.

The stupidest "safety" of them all are the trigger safeties on the plastic guns. The one on the M&P being the most useless thing in the world.

 

[NMGonzo]

I'll be the first to admit, I'm not a 1911 owner, only an occasional shooter of others while at the range and they're shooting my CZ, but... Isn't decocing part of the point of the beaver tail? Bring the hammer further back into the beavertail activating the grip safety, then pull trigger and control hammer forward?

Or have I been doing this wrong?

remove ammo from weapon

decock

 

[BullfrogKen]

Or have I been doing this wrong?

Yes.

A mag disconnect would have prevented my son from blowing a hold in my wall with my PM45 - and he's a cop.

A safety feature is never a crutch for poor gun handling skills.

I can see a case for it having some usefulness for officers losing a struggle over his/her gun. I don't concern myself with it. I don't carry in holsters with retention levels, either. But if I were a uniformed officer I might appreciate both.

 

[GLOOB]

It also locks the slide so it can't be pushed out of battery by a tight holster.

Actually, if you're reholstering with your regular grip, the slide will be unlocked like any other gun. If you shift your grip to put your thumb on the back of the slide, then the grip safety will lock the slide... but now that feature is sorta redundant, no?

And it prevents even loading it unless you have a proper grip on the gun.

I agree this statement is factual. But it's moot. I've never seen any inexperienced gun handler that was able to rack a slide without a proper grip. And many of them can't even do it, then. Also, some may find it difficult to reach the slide lock while covering the grip safety, for when you want to lock the slide back for w/e reason (e.g. "unload and show clear!").

 

[labhound]

Here's an instance where a gun with a magazine safety would have kept one of our members from shooting himself.

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=563050&highlight=negligent+discharge

 

[Girodin]

Now, don't XDs have grip safeties? Grip safeties are FAR DUMBER than magazine disconnects. Somewhat hypocritical if you ask me.

I love conclusions with no evidence or argument.

Grip safeties are what makes a 1911 more difficult to de-cock that need be.

Why are you de-cocking your 1911?

The stupidest "safety" of them all are the trigger safeties on the plastic guns.

Are some of these there for drop safe concerns?

I view a mag disconnect as a liability on a defensive gun. I can imagine scenarios where one might need to fire a round when there is no magazine in the gun. I personally do not see a real issue with grip safeties

Safe gun handling would have been a more sure prevention to any of the gun accidents people claim some device would have stopped. Unsafe gun handling is just an accident waiting to happen in another way at another time even if in a particular incident some feature might have prevented it.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

Grip safeties are what makes a 1911 more difficult to de-cock that need be.

Why on earth would you ever decock a loaded M1911?

 

[easyg]

A safety feature is never a crutch for poor gun handling skills.

True.

But humans are not perfect....we all make mistakes.

 

[Bonesinium]

This thread has nothing to do with the validity of decocking a 1911 so why are there 15 posts about it? (16 now I guess). It is about grip safeties and magazine disconnects.

Both grip safeties and magazine disconnects have practical purposes for being on a handgun, in certain situations, for certain people. Unless a particular grip safety is uncomfortable to you, I don't see it as any sort of hindrance or problem for me. I am all for a gun not firing when it is not being held. It is a safety feature, as the name grip safety would suggest. If you feel you are above needing and safety features, because you are the safest gun handler in the world who will never, ever make any mistake, then I could see why you would hate it. (I'm not saying a grip safety is a necessity, just that is can have a purpose)

A magazine disconnect is also a type of safety. Do I personally want one in my pistols? No. I've had the option and passed. Would I go as far to say I would never get one that happen to have one? Nope. I can't think of a probable scenario in which having a magazine disconnect would be a bad thing for me. I just don't want one. But then again, if I ever happen to have a negligent discharge for failing to properly clear my pistol I would probably change my mind. And that is why magazine disconnects also serve a valid purpose.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

The rationalle behind the magazine disconnector is simple. There is an established order for clearming an automatic pistol.

1. Drop the magazine.
2. Rack the slide.
3. Drop the hammer.

People have been known to get steps 1 and 2 reversed.

 

[gudel]

I have guns with mag disconnect and grip safety. I never had any problems with them.

 

[M2 Carbine]

I hate magazine "safeties" and remove them whenever I can.

I tolerate grip safeties because I've been using them on 1911 pistols since 1960 but I rather any gun didn't have one.

 

[BullfrogKen]

A safety feature is never a crutch for poor gun handling skills.

True.

But humans are not perfect....we all make mistakes.

That's also true. So then tell me why we would want to allow ourselves to become complacent with our gun handling skills because of a feature - a magazine disconnect? Especially when one considers they're not on most handguns.

The proper technique to administratively handle a gun is to confirm it's unloaded. That includes both

• removing the magazine,
• and confirming the chamber is empty.

Nearly any negligent discharge that results in an injury can be traced back to a failure to follow the Four Rules. And it's usually a combination of at least two that made it happen:

1. All guns are always loaded.
2. Never point the gun at anything you are not willing to destroy.
3. Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on target (and you have made the decision to shoot).
4. Be sure of your target and what is beyond it.

Relying on a magazine disconnect to make up for Rule #1 allows poor thinking and habits to develop.

 

[saltydog452]

My 1/2 cent.

There is something that is simply plain, flat, wrong thinking about a 'safety' on the face of the trigger or a requirement that a magazine be inserted to lower the hammer in order to 'make the gun safe'.

I used to operate a 'Catapuller' forklift that had the fwd and reverse both operatred by the right foot. Down from the top with your toes for fwd, or down from the bottom with your heel for reverse. It too was a brilliant idea that didn't work out too well in practice.

Some things are 'safety' features in name only. Congress seems to gin out a bunch of those

salty

 

[Girodin]

This thread has nothing to do with the validity of decocking a 1911 so why are there 15 posts about it? (16 now I guess). It is about grip safeties and magazine disconnects.

Because the only reasoning the OP gave for why grip safeties are undesirable was that they make decocking a 1911 more difficult. People are pointing out that why that argument is less than convincing. Even more ironic is that the OP started by talking about grip safeties being bad on XDs where his sole critique of them is not even an issue.

 

[Lvl21nerd]

I like the idea of a grip safety, especially for a gun with a hair trigger. I like knowing that if i touch the trigger in any fashion while not GRIPING the gun, so as to fire it, the it wont go off.

Mag disconnect safeties on the other hand make pretty much zero sense to me. I want to be able to fire the weapon even without a magazine in it. What if something happens to my one and only magazine (if i only had one at a certain time) and i still need to use the weapon to defend myself? with a mag safety, what??..do i throw it at the guy? And i really dont want something messing with the trigger pull (though i dont mind firing pin blocks too much).

 

[easyg]

That's also true. So then tell me why we would want to allow ourselves to become complacent with our gun handling skills because of a feature - a magazine disconnect? Especially when one considers they're not on most handguns.

I don't think that anyone actually wants to become complacent with their gun handling skills.
But humans sometimes get careless or allow themselves to become distracted...even when handling firearms.

The proper technique to administratively handle a gun is to confirm it's unloaded. That includes both
removing the magazine,
and confirming the chamber is empty.

I agree.
But this doesn't change the fact that there are negligent discharges every year by folks who truly thought that their gun was unloaded.

Nearly any negligent discharge that results in an injury can be traced back to a failure to follow the Four Rules. And it's usually a combination of at least two that made it happen:

Again, I agree with you 100%.
But determining exactly what mistakes were made by the gun handler after the negligent discharge really does us no good, nor does it save lives.

If some idiot is pointing a loaded gun, which he thinks is unloaded, in an unsafe direction and then pulls the trigger....sure, he has violated numerous firearms safety rules....but that will not stop someone from getting hit by the bullet he just fired.
However, a magazine disconnect just might.

Relying on a magazine disconnect to make up for Rule #1 allows poor thinking and habits to develop.

Again, I don't think anyone actually relies upon a magazine disconnect with the intentions of violating safety rules....
I've never seen anyone at a range saying "Check out how my magazine disconnect works. I'm going to point this gun at that guy over there...."

As I said before, I'm not a big fan of them, but I really don't understand where the hatred of them comes from.


.

 

[Lvl21nerd]

one poster mentioned how he didnt like trigger safeties; i totally agree.
glocks to me seem to be some of the most dangerous autos on the market; maybe im missing something but i would never want to carry a glock with one in the chamber if i could instead carry a 1911 C&L

 

[easyg]

There is something that is simply plain, flat, wrong thinking about a 'safety' on the face of the trigger or a requirement that a magazine be inserted to lower the hammer in order to 'make the gun safe'.

I guess it depends upon the gun design, but the Ruger SR9c, which does have a magazine disconnect, does not require that the magazine be in place in order to make the gun safe.

If you cock it and then remove the magazine and pull the trigger, the striker is released and the pistol will no longer be cocked, but the gun will not fire.

And just an FYI...the magazine disconnect on the Ruger SR9c is very easily removed. Or so I've been told....


.

 

[easyg]

one poster mentioned how he didnt like trigger safeties; i totally agree.
glocks to me seem to be some of the most dangerous autos on the market; maybe im missing something but i would never want to carry a glock with one in the chamber if i could instead carry a 1911 C&L

glocks are perfectly safe...

IF

you carry them in a holster that covers the trigger and trigger-guard

AND

you don't pull the trigger until you are ready to shoot.



And if you can't do those two things then a Glock is not the gun for you.

 

[ny32182]

I prefer not to have a magazine safety: First I'm a lefty, and would not carry without a holster that protects the mag catch, but just out of redundance I don't want the gun disabled in the event the magazine is released. If some PDs have data they think shows that having one is better when the gun is being wrestled with, fine. I think rcmodel also mentioned some good points I hadn't really considered before. What I DON'T see is the validity of the argument that they prevent AD. If I want to drop the hammer on a gun I think is unloaded, I'm going to do it. I've already checked it to be unloaded. If I screwed that up, I screwed it up. I would just slap the mag in and pull the trigger. If it is gonna be loaded, its gonna be loaded.

Grip safties; I'm ambivalent. Assuming they are working correctly I don't really care if my pistol has one or not. I'd go 51% "no" since it may just be something that can malfunction depending on the design, which I'm not familiar with. I've never heard of them being a problem though.

Trigger safeties; I'm only familiar with the one on the Glock. I'm fairly ambivalent, but the point of the design is to make sure that a good solid push to the center of the trigger is needed to fire. I think the situation where it could be beneficial is when holstering; it may prevent AD in the event that a wad of shirt or something pulls on the edge of the trigger rather than the center.

 

[BullfrogKen]

I don't think that anyone actually wants to become complacent with their gun handling skills.

It doesn’t matter what someone wants or intends; it’s a byproduct of the mindset. A gun with a magazine in it or not is a loaded gun. A gun with a magazine disconnect or without is a loaded gun. See Rule#1. We do not allow ourselves to entertain in our mind any notion that suggests a safety device can permit us to allow some creep to occur in how we handle a firearm.

If some idiot is pointing a loaded gun, which he thinks is unloaded, in an unsafe direction and then pulls the trigger....sure, he has violated numerous firearms safety rules....but that will not stop someone from getting hit by the bullet he just fired.
However, a magazine disconnect just might.

That’s an example of the creep I speak of.


We, as gun owners, assert that we can be trusted to own guns. Furthermore we assert we can be trusted to safely carry them with us throughout our day for our protection. Corollary with that right we have a responsibility to embed safe gun handling skills to the point of habit. Nowhere in those expressions of responsibility and trust is there any room to suggest a device can compensate for our poor gun handling skills.

If some idiot is pointing a loaded gun

Rule #1 – All guns are always loaded

which he thinks is unloaded

Again Rule #1 – All guns are always loaded

in an unsafe direction

Rule #2 - Never point the gun at anything you are not willing to destroy.
Rule #4 - Be sure of your target and what is beyond it.

and then pulls the trigger.

Rule #3- Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on target (and you have made the decision to shoot)

You just described a scenario where All Four Rules were violated. A “safety device” cannot compensate for stupid gun handling. Only through responsible behavior and consciously mastering those Four Simple Rules to the point of unconscious competence can we prevent such negligence.

But humans sometimes get careless or allow themselves to become distracted...even when handling firearms.

That attitude suggests people cannot be trusted.
I assert a completely different attitude - If someone needs a safety device to compensate for poor gun handling, he has two choices:
Either learn good gun handling skills, and practice them until they become habit;
Or don’t own a gun.

 

[ForumSurfer]

glocks to me seem to be some of the most dangerous autos on the market

I grew up on 1911's and that's all I've owned my entire life...save a lone beretta 96 and some bequeathed revolvers.

I recently bought my first glock. After spending some time practicing my draw and presentation, and sending a couple thousand rounds downrange...I feel much more confident with it.

At first I didn't like to leave it chambered. The trigger safety seemed silly.

Things are different now. I feel just as safe carrying either platform "chambered, cocked and locked." Well, I still think the trigger safety is silly...that hasn't changed. Anything likely to snag the trigger will likely snag he safety, too.

 

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

glocks are perfectly safe...

IF

you carry them in a holster that covers the trigger and trigger-guard

AND

you don't pull the trigger until you are ready to shoot.

This has never made sense to me, you NEED a holster in order for a Glock to be considered safe, what if you don't have one? Don't tell me you always have one because thats impossible.