newfalguy101
Member
I like em on the gun, but, actually rarely use them...............so I can go either way
Manual safetys on semi pistols - yes or no?
- Thread starter Hokkmike
- Start date
- Status
1John1:9
Member
I prefer No, but would be OK with a safety if I trained with it.
I started carrying 2 years ago, and my first gun was the SR9c. I think it's a good gun to start with (safety and that big old "loaded when up" thing).
I ended up getting a Walther P99 and have been carrying it regularly for the last 18 months. To keep all my guns on the same system, I converted my PX4 from a F model to a G model, so that it only has a decocker. I traded the SR9c for a Sig P232, and that is my back up gun now. So all my guns are DA/SA and that is my preference. I really don't think in a situation, I'll have the wherewithal to remember if the gun I'm carrying has a safety or not. So I'm sticking with one type. Oh yea, I kept my Ruger LCR, DAO revolver.
I agree with hometeached1: Train with whatever you have.
I started carrying 2 years ago, and my first gun was the SR9c. I think it's a good gun to start with (safety and that big old "loaded when up" thing).
I ended up getting a Walther P99 and have been carrying it regularly for the last 18 months. To keep all my guns on the same system, I converted my PX4 from a F model to a G model, so that it only has a decocker. I traded the SR9c for a Sig P232, and that is my back up gun now. So all my guns are DA/SA and that is my preference. I really don't think in a situation, I'll have the wherewithal to remember if the gun I'm carrying has a safety or not. So I'm sticking with one type. Oh yea, I kept my Ruger LCR, DAO revolver.
I agree with hometeached1: Train with whatever you have.
"It depends"
I certainly like them on SAO designs like my 1911s. Remembering to use it is a matter of training.
On a DA/SA or true DAO with a heavy and long trigger pull? Absolutely not. It just isn't needed.
Striker fired guns? I could go either way... But generally I don't feel you need one.
I certainly like them on SAO designs like my 1911s. Remembering to use it is a matter of training.
On a DA/SA or true DAO with a heavy and long trigger pull? Absolutely not. It just isn't needed.
Striker fired guns? I could go either way... But generally I don't feel you need one.
Bought the S&W 380 Bodyguard. One of the reason I like it for ccw is the safety
I do not like the safeties on these small pistols. First off they are too small to be useful and most are right hand only, I am a lefty. The only safety I want is revolver like, my head and my finger. Your fine motor skills are the first thing to go in a gun fight and to find something that's 1/4 inch wide and flush with the frame is a challenge, "No thank you". I will use my head and finger only. Same goes for magazine safeties. Why? Ruger makes the LCP with no external safeties at all, and then they build the LC 9mm with all kinds of safeties, frame mounted safety, magazine safety. I don't get it. Maybe the people who use the LCP are finger out of the trigger guard people I guess. Anyway that's just me, others like them and power to them. You have to choose.
Because they wanted to sell it in CA. The "safe gun" requirements got tighter by the time the LC9 would have been sent for approval.
CA screws things up for everyone.
So they can sell it in California. I hate to say it but for me they lost a NH resident. Might as well put a 10lb trigger in it also and sell it in Mass. Gee lets see how bout 10 lb trigger, seven round magazines, a mag safety and frame mounted safety. Did I forget a state? Humm, I don't think so. It's like chasing your own tail.
FIVETWOSEVEN
Member
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2009
- Messages
- 5,146
CZs don't need a manual safety at all. I carry mine at half cock where I can't put the safety on.
It's all about risk management.
Thumb lever type manual firing inhibitor, or any other type that requires motion separate from firing the pistol, may reduce some risk while increasing or creating some other risks.
It reduces risk of accidental discharge if something pulls the trigger when the user does not intend to. But, do not forget the obvious fact that it only works when the device is engaged. What does that mean? It means it will not save you from "I thought the gun was empty" discharges, since a user will deliberately pull the trigger and have the device disengaged in those situations. It will also not reduce that risk if you use the doctrine of holding the gun in ready position with the device disengaged.
The risk is that it can be engaged when user do intend to fire, resulting in the user being unable to stop a dangerous threat.
That can happen in a number of ways. The lever can be moved because it came into contact with an object while the user is maneuvering or while in a physical struggle with an opponent.
Some people argue that the accidental lever movement is not a problem because the user should keep downward pressure on the lever. However, that is not a universal solution because that style of gripping is does not result in the best shooting effectiveness with everyone. This writer, for example, do not want any pressure applied downward by the thumb on one side of the pistol, applying torqing force on the gun on both horizontal and vertical plane when I need stablity. Also, that solution would not work with slide lever or abbreviated type of lever on the frame.
Another risk is that the manipulation failure becomes a high probabliity if there is a hand injury.
Depending on your doctrine of using the device, it can make your response slower when the manipulation of the lever makes your shooting respose slower than if the gun did not have such a device. Many people will argue that there is no added time because the manipulation is done during transition from ready position or drawing to aiming position, but that is wrong generalization.
Most training institutions will teach trainees to constantly engage or disengage every time the gun comes off an intended target, and that may cause a person to encounter situation where they would be manipulating the lever while decision to shoot or not changes. When shoot or no-shoot decision changes multiple times quickly, the thought process and speed of thumb doing the manipulation may not be able to keep up with the decision speed, even if the manipulation process is subconscious, or cause a confusion.
Of course, that never becomes a problem on a range with paper target that basically says which target is a "shoot" and which target is a "no shoot" target with no ambiguity or dynamic "shoot" and "no shoot" changes, unlike real life.
Instructors such as Rob Pincus even challenged people to complete his course offiering that he would refund the tuition if the person is able to complete the course with no operator error of manual firing inhibitors.
Many advocates of the manual firing inhibitor said that manual firing inhibitor is not a risk with proper training. They are wrong on two points. Training do reduce the above mentioned risk associcated with the device, however it can only reduce it. It will never eliminate the risk.
Also, when people who states manual firing inhibitor is mandatory are claiming training will solve all risks of the device, they are contradicting themselves. Their reasoning is that manual firing ihibitor is needed because operators cannot eliminate all mistakes and unforseen issues that can lead to the trigger accidentally being pulled no matter how careful operators are. But, they contradict themselves when, at the same time, they claim all mistakes and unforseen issues that can lead to manual firing inhibitor not being manipulated correctly or expereince a device failure can be eliminated with training. It is irrational to claim training will not eliminate trigger mistakes no matter what the training level, and claim that training will completely eliminate manual firing inhibitor lever mistakes or other issues at the same time.
The fact of the matter is that manual firing inhibitor that requires motion seprarate from firing, like thumb lever types, will require some sort of doctrine regarding when it should be engaged and when it would be disengaged and the transition between the two. The transition will require a manipulation and a decision to recognize the condition and time to act. Most people who advocate such manual firing inhibitor devices will claim that if a person train to a degree that the decision is on a subconscious level, the time will be minimal or no time is lost.
A problem with that argument is that there can be a number of cases where the situation does not appear to be clearly falling into two disticnt preselected category of when it should be engaged or disengaged. Then the decision can no longer be subconsious. Even more of a danger is that vague or nondistict situation that does not fall into any pre-defined category disrupting decision making process,"Uuuuhhhh should I flick it on or off? I never thought of this situation before. uuuhhhhh..." can delay or distract the user from taking necessary action.
Thumb lever type manual firing inhibitor, or any other type that requires motion separate from firing the pistol, may reduce some risk while increasing or creating some other risks.
It reduces risk of accidental discharge if something pulls the trigger when the user does not intend to. But, do not forget the obvious fact that it only works when the device is engaged. What does that mean? It means it will not save you from "I thought the gun was empty" discharges, since a user will deliberately pull the trigger and have the device disengaged in those situations. It will also not reduce that risk if you use the doctrine of holding the gun in ready position with the device disengaged.
The risk is that it can be engaged when user do intend to fire, resulting in the user being unable to stop a dangerous threat.
That can happen in a number of ways. The lever can be moved because it came into contact with an object while the user is maneuvering or while in a physical struggle with an opponent.
Some people argue that the accidental lever movement is not a problem because the user should keep downward pressure on the lever. However, that is not a universal solution because that style of gripping is does not result in the best shooting effectiveness with everyone. This writer, for example, do not want any pressure applied downward by the thumb on one side of the pistol, applying torqing force on the gun on both horizontal and vertical plane when I need stablity. Also, that solution would not work with slide lever or abbreviated type of lever on the frame.
Another risk is that the manipulation failure becomes a high probabliity if there is a hand injury.
Depending on your doctrine of using the device, it can make your response slower when the manipulation of the lever makes your shooting respose slower than if the gun did not have such a device. Many people will argue that there is no added time because the manipulation is done during transition from ready position or drawing to aiming position, but that is wrong generalization.
Most training institutions will teach trainees to constantly engage or disengage every time the gun comes off an intended target, and that may cause a person to encounter situation where they would be manipulating the lever while decision to shoot or not changes. When shoot or no-shoot decision changes multiple times quickly, the thought process and speed of thumb doing the manipulation may not be able to keep up with the decision speed, even if the manipulation process is subconscious, or cause a confusion.
Of course, that never becomes a problem on a range with paper target that basically says which target is a "shoot" and which target is a "no shoot" target with no ambiguity or dynamic "shoot" and "no shoot" changes, unlike real life.
Instructors such as Rob Pincus even challenged people to complete his course offiering that he would refund the tuition if the person is able to complete the course with no operator error of manual firing inhibitors.
Many advocates of the manual firing inhibitor said that manual firing inhibitor is not a risk with proper training. They are wrong on two points. Training do reduce the above mentioned risk associcated with the device, however it can only reduce it. It will never eliminate the risk.
Also, when people who states manual firing inhibitor is mandatory are claiming training will solve all risks of the device, they are contradicting themselves. Their reasoning is that manual firing ihibitor is needed because operators cannot eliminate all mistakes and unforseen issues that can lead to the trigger accidentally being pulled no matter how careful operators are. But, they contradict themselves when, at the same time, they claim all mistakes and unforseen issues that can lead to manual firing inhibitor not being manipulated correctly or expereince a device failure can be eliminated with training. It is irrational to claim training will not eliminate trigger mistakes no matter what the training level, and claim that training will completely eliminate manual firing inhibitor lever mistakes or other issues at the same time.
The fact of the matter is that manual firing inhibitor that requires motion seprarate from firing, like thumb lever types, will require some sort of doctrine regarding when it should be engaged and when it would be disengaged and the transition between the two. The transition will require a manipulation and a decision to recognize the condition and time to act. Most people who advocate such manual firing inhibitor devices will claim that if a person train to a degree that the decision is on a subconscious level, the time will be minimal or no time is lost.
A problem with that argument is that there can be a number of cases where the situation does not appear to be clearly falling into two disticnt preselected category of when it should be engaged or disengaged. Then the decision can no longer be subconsious. Even more of a danger is that vague or nondistict situation that does not fall into any pre-defined category disrupting decision making process,"Uuuuhhhh should I flick it on or off? I never thought of this situation before. uuuhhhhh..." can delay or distract the user from taking necessary action.
^^^
Wrong.
If a user do not want it, leaving it disangaged still leaves the user with the risk of the lever of button being moved by accident.
Countless people will such devices have found the device engaged or disengaged contrary to user's intent due to accidental contact.
That reasoning is why someone might think a saftey is a good thing. They say if you don't want the gun to go bang, keep your finger off the trigger. Well if you don't want the safety engaged keep your finger off of it.
I respect everyone's opinion. Choose what you like, but so many people give the reason for not wanting one as accidental engagement, yet a lot of those people act like accidental engagement of a trigger is impossible. I realize the position of the safety makes it more likely to be touched, but it is still the same principal
^^^ too! I frequently check the safety on my SR9c because it gets bumped off occasionally.
I always practice swiping it off every single time. It's the only way to safely carry a gun with a safetyl
rcmodel
Member in memoriam
Not.
If your safety gets engaged or disengaged by accident??
You my friend need to buy a better holster design!!!
That cheap nylon 'one-size-fits-all' one you got is not doing it's job.
rc
JTQ
Member
Come on man, could you stop with that? Can't you just use the proper terms that are used in the owner's manuals?
Do we need to call you TestFlightControlManipulator? If you are a TestPilot, how do the folks at work like it when you use non-standard terms not used in the flight manuals or TO's?
OK, we get it, you don't like manual safety's on pistols, but please try and use proper terminology.
By the way, are there any guarded switches on any of the aircraft you fly? Do any of those guarded switches prevent firing or releasing of weapons?
Last edited:
rcmodel
Member in memoriam
Well, I beg to differ.
But I have carried 1911's, and others for well on 50 years with never a problem with a safety just getting 'bumped off'.
My primary 1911 carry holsters cover the safety, and pretty much lock it on safe due to the leather being molded around the safety when the gun was fitted to it.
Or, maybe your gun needs repaired so the safety doesn't come un-stuck quite so easy???
Or you are carrying a right-handed gun in a left side holster with the safety sticking out in the wind??
Or a gun with ambidextrous safety's, with one side always sticking out in the wind??
Otherwise, I just can't see it happening, except as some sort of fluke occurrence once in a very long time.
rc
But I have carried 1911's, and others for well on 50 years with never a problem with a safety just getting 'bumped off'.
My primary 1911 carry holsters cover the safety, and pretty much lock it on safe due to the leather being molded around the safety when the gun was fitted to it.
Or, maybe your gun needs repaired so the safety doesn't come un-stuck quite so easy???
Or you are carrying a right-handed gun in a left side holster with the safety sticking out in the wind??
Or a gun with ambidextrous safety's, with one side always sticking out in the wind??
Otherwise, I just can't see it happening, except as some sort of fluke occurrence once in a very long time.
rc
osteodoc08
Member
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2005
- Messages
- 1,261
Unless it's a 1911, I don't want one. I prefer point and shoot. I've really been happy with the striker fired guns, but still love my Sig P series and 1911's. It depends on my mood on what I carry. For the last few years it has been my M&P40c. I'd love to find an original P228. Still on the hunt for the perfect P229, might just get the M11 and call it a day.
When I carried my 1911 every day, I NEVER had an issue with the safety. My leather holster covered the safety and had a molded spot in the leather to "lock" it in the safe position.
When I carried my 1911 every day, I NEVER had an issue with the safety. My leather holster covered the safety and had a molded spot in the leather to "lock" it in the safe position.
I don't carry a 1911, RC. It's a Ruger SR9c and the safety works just fine. My primary holsters are High Noon and Crossbreed. I'm right handed and carry it as such. It is an ambi safety which is why it occasionally gets bumped off. Not a lot. Just enough that I'm aware of it and make a point to check the safety regularly and maintain my practice routine of swiping it down EVERY TIME.
I never said accidental trigger activation is impossible.
It all comes down to risk management.
However, accidental trigger movement is about the only risk involved with not having a manual firing inhibitor that require separate manipulation from firing motion. That is about the only risk. Compared to that, having one involves multiple risks as mentioned above.
Because of that the total combined risk involved with having such device outweighs the risk of not having one, according to many people's assessment.
That does not mean your assessment need to be the same.
Last edited:
Who says it can only happen while gun is holstered?
It can be accidentally swiped during a struggle or manipulations such as malfunction clearing.
I already know some people are going to say "keep it pressed down, blah blah..." but that technique do not work for everyone or every gun with a thumb lever.
"Proper" according to who?
I refuse to call a device that does not make a gun safer a "safety" here.
I am not a pilot. The ID was originated from a game.
Anyway, I do not know of any fighter pilot who whips out an F22 from the holster after getting a surprise attack from a criminal emerging from a dark alley, then skillfully powers on the weapon systems from a cold engine while dodging bullets. If you don't get the humor in this, what I am saying is that a pistol and a fighter is a totally different weapon system used in totally different context.
Actually there was a case of switch manipulation failure causing a lost firing opportunity. There was a case where a pilot lost a chance to fire an AIM-9 because he thought there was no missile tone(AIM-9 makes an audible tone to the speaker when the missile seeker locks on to a target) when there was because the audio switch was down by accident.
Last edited:
JTQ
Member
According to the manufacturer of the firearm.
Now I understand.
There are plenty of things that are done differently from manufacturer's document that are still proper.
If anything that is not according to manucacturer documents is improper, many popular guns should not even be used for self-defense, since user manual of some guns that are even issued to police says not to shoot at people with it.
Do you carry a gun empty if manufacturer manual says do not load until you are about to shoot it?
Are you going to tell all those people who carries Glock for self-defense, "You are not using Glock propery. Glock manual says 'CAUTION: DO NOT CARRY THE PISTOL IN THE READY TO FIRE CONDITON. THIS IS NOT THE RECOMMENDED SAFE-CARRYING METHOD FOR CIVILIAN USE.'"
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked