Manual safetys on semi pistols - yes or no?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Perhaps I should have stated this better:

Two of my LEO friends carry Glocks without a round in the chamber when they are off duty, except of course if going into a higher risk area. When on duty they follow their department rules.

I just spoke with one of them at a Christmas party and he said something like "The chance of me having to shoot someone off duty is less than one in a million and not worth the risk of a negligent discharge."

Every couple of months there is a story about some CC shooting themselves in the arse http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2013/12...-of-wallet-shoots-self-in-butt-at-home-depot/ and that is bad press for all of us.
 
45_auto said:
As far as I know, no one is stupid enough to market a single-action semi-automatic without a manual safety.

But apparently non de forum thinks that a manual safety isn't needed on a modern-design single action. Maybe he thinks people are a lot smarter than they were 102 years ago?

I'm hoping he'll tell us why.
Click to expand...


Ok, I am all for trying something different by getting to you to think about something differently. Your hope is not futile. I hope this will help you understand your misperception.

jerkface 11 in Post #324 asked “What single action doesn't have a manual safety?”

My answer - An example would be the Colt SAA of 1873. Another example would be Tokarev of 1933. There are also other S.A. semi-autos that do not. Do you see where this is going yet, 45 Auto?

45 Auto in Post #320 asked “Why don't you think a manual safety is necessary on a modern semi-automatic pistol design with a light single-action trigger?”

I don’t think this for the same reason I don’t think unicorns are real.

Now here is what you really need to think about: It cannot be a modern semiautomatic if it uses a single action system. There is no such thing as a modern design single action semi automatic. There are only new designs using the very “un-modern” ( to coin a word) single action system.

As far as people being smarter now than 102 years ago, no I do not believe that. Everything I have read on the subject of I.Q. indicates that despite advances in nutrition and medicine since WWII, average I.Q. has dropped about 15 points over the last 100 years. It is attributed to more educated women having less children than their less educated peers. How many brothers and sisters do you have? Just kidding.;)

:what: Because the gun will fire without the magazine in it? You are really funny guy 45 Auto! N.S.S. That is not the answer I was attempting to elicit.
 
To Nick Burkhardt,


Once more with feeling. YOUR FRIENDS SHOULD STOP DOING THIS BEFORE THEY GET THEMSELVES KILLED! I hope you can figure out why before I have to type a lengthy explanation.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps I should have stated this better:

Two of my LEO friends carry Glocks without a round in the chamber when they are off duty, except of course if going into a higher risk area. When on duty they follow their department rules.
Click to expand...

I believe we understood it clearly the first time around.

I just spoke with one of them at a Christmas party and he said something like "The chance of me having to shoot someone off duty is less than one in a million and not worth the risk of a negligent discharge."
Click to expand...

Again, the probability of getting into a gun fight, and the deadliness of each of those gun fight when it does happen is not relevant to each other.

Just because the probability is low, it does not mean the encounter is less deadly and time critical when it does happen.

Every couple of months there is a story about some CC shooting themselves in the arse http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2013/12/...at-home-depot/ and that is bad press for all of us.
Click to expand...

Accidental discharge with people carrying guns are not exclusive to pistols without manual firing inhibitor thumb levers.
 
Well, this has been entertaining.

I like my carry pistols to be one switch to bang, meaning safe to carry without the need to engage a manual safety which would then have to be disengaged to fire. Sure, many people successfully operate manual safety handguns, just as many manage not to have NDs without a manual safety. It's matter of choice and training to match that choice.

If a car analogy is appropriate, then try this one--

Many driving trainers teach that there is almost always a better crash avoidance option--steering, for example--than slamming on the brakes, modern anti-lock systems notwithstanding. That would, in a way, make slamming on the brakes a measure of last resort, just as is pulling the trigger.

Poor training is what makes drivers default to heavy braking as the answer to any traffic emergency. Still, even though I am a skilled and experienced driver with professional credentials, I know there are going to be times when immediate heavy braking may in fact be the best way to avoid or minimize the impact of a traffic emergency. I can't imagine a car that employs a switch that must be manipulated before the brakes can be applied.

No matter how well trained you are, would you drive your family around in such a car?
 
^^^ Driving safety is a combination of brakes... and steering... and acceleration... depending on the particular danger(s) at hand at that moment. There is no "only-one-right-answer-for-everyone". As spoon-boy in the movie Matrix said, "There is no spoon". Frankly, I'm sick and tired of some folks trying to ram there opinions down my throat. I ain't gonna swallow.
 
Nick, If those officers carried in a good holster there would be no ND associated with their pistols. The problem is that if they train a certain way they should carry the same way. I have no idea what their standing is but I can tell you they should carry just like they work. In the same condition with the same amount of ammo in their pistols. Here's the deal, police officers are taught to carry their pistol full up with a round chambered. If they get into it and have to use their sidearm the AG's office will investigate and count ever round they have to have. You have to account for every bullet and if you pistol holds 15 in the mag and one in the pipe they are looking for 16 rounds of ammo and where they went. I did 30 years in LE and retired and now I work for the court system. I'm training 150 people every year. These officers have to qualify with their duty handgun and their off duty handguns. LE policies are tight right down to the round they can carry. It's nothing like the civilian world. Everything is accountable. If an officer carries ammo that's not issued he has opened a can of worms. If that unissued round he chooses goes through someone and kills an innocent they are going to hang him or her out to dry. I have been in this business a long time and seen a lot and this is not the norm trust me on that one. How they are carrying their pistols is not correct, whether they are on duty or off does not change the fact that they are police officers all the time. I'm about done with this thread issue we are all spinning wheels here. Tell your friends to stay safe.
 
Mike1234567 said:
Because I want the gun to go bang with the chambered round if the mag is somehow released in a struggle... not likely to happen so maybe I'm over-thinking it.
Click to expand...

This is the same flawed reasoning I hear from people saying that during a struggle to retain control of your pistol the assailant may be unable to disengage the safety. Don't count on it! In your attempts to regain control you may intentionally or unintentionally disengage it. Ok, let us say someone makes a grab for your pistol. You both end up trying to wrench the pistol out of the others hand in a 50/50 struggle of smarts and brawn. You have a 50% chance of being shot. What motion is easier to do to prevent a discharge at you or your assailant. Keeping the safety on by constant pressure, keeping both of your fingers off the trigger, or one brief push of the mag release button? With one much easier movement you end any chance of someone getting shot

The mag safety feature is one of the reasons I am thinking of dumping the Glock for a M&P.

I really never hear about situations where someone has needed to fire the one round in the chamber to save a life after the mag got dumped.
 
Mike1234567 said:
^^^ Driving safety is a combination of brakes... and steering... and acceleration... depending on the particular danger(s) at hand at that moment. There is no "only-one-right-answer-for-everyone". As spoon-boy in the movie Matrix said, "There is no spoon". Frankly, I'm sick and tired of some folks trying to ram there opinions down my throat. I ain't gonna swallow.
Click to expand...

We are not compelling you to remain in the discussion. It is your choice alone if you wish to engage or disengage from it.
 
^^^ Yes, those who don't want thumb safeties shouldn't have them. I'm not forcing my opinion on them. I'm just tired of those trying to force their opinions otherwise.:)
 
Just two points of additional information for the haters:

1) We live in the modern day equivalent of Mayberry R.F.D. not Detroit.

2) Both of these guys are six foot tall barrel chested badasses who probably think that nobody would be stupid enough to mess with them.

So there may be an overconfidence issue.
 
jerkface said:
He didn't say single action. And you know that isn't what he meant.
Click to expand...

He appears to differ with your opinion. Possibly if you had thrown in a few terms like "pre-loaded spring positioned firing inhibitor thumb lever safety device" he may have been more inclined to agree with you.

non de forum said:
It cannot be a modern semiautomatic if it uses a single action system. There is no such thing as a modern design single action semi automatic. There are only new designs using the very “un-modern” ( to coin a word) single action system.
Click to expand...

This rates right up there with the old Gecko45 posts!

What do you consider the cut-off date for a "modern" design?
 
Last edited:
Nick Burkhardt said:
Just two points of additional information for the haters:

1) We live in the modern day equivalent of Mayberry R.F.D. not Detroit.

2) Both of these guys are six foot tall barrel chested badasses who probably think that nobody would be stupid enough to mess with them.

So there may be an overconfidence issue.
Click to expand...


Nick,

I am not a hater. I am just concerned these guys are carrying the pistols in two different conditions of readiness and it could get them killed. When on duty they are naturally maintaining a heightened state of awareness and are trained to react with pistols that have a round in the chamber. They are conditioned to react with a round in the chamber. When off duty the unexpected, sudden, and rapid change to a heightened state of awareness will make the default reaction the same. Expecting a bang they will hear a click and then could be out of time on Earth.
 
45_auto said:
He appears to differ with your opinion:

This rates right up there with the old Gecko45 posts!

What do you consider the cut-off date for a "modern" design?
Click to expand...

You are really pathetic in your attempts to bait me and others. I have been a member of THR for years longer than you and damn well know who Gecko45 is. You have now demonstrated you are a waste of time and inexcusably rude. Good-bye, good riddance.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
Used but RELIABLE 9mm pistol with rail for $250?
Replies
20
Views
1K
Jamie C.
J
C
  • Locked
Manual Safety-Yes or No
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
134
Views
4K
Snaps
S
R
  • Locked
Why so few with manual safety?
2
Replies
37
Views
1K
TexasRifleman
T
cluttonfred
  • Locked
Why does the U.S. military require manual safeties on pistols?
2
Replies
46
Views
6K
JHansenAK47
J
G
  • Locked
Glock w/ cominolli manual safet = JUST as safe as any other SA??
Replies
14
Views
985
The Lone Haranguer
T
Back
Top