My trigger finger is my safety

Discussion in 'Handguns: Autoloaders' started by Nom de Forum, Jan 1, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Homerboy

    Homerboy Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2007
    Messages:
    671
    Location:
    NE Pennsylvania
    I have no issues with a Glock or any other striker fired guns, either. They are here and here to stay. In the hands of a skilled gun owner they are fine weapons. The issue I have with them is that the light trigger pull, lack of a hammer to rest your thumb on as you holster (where a LOT of ND's happen, ESPECIALLY in a stressful situation that cops face often) and the lack of a manual safety make a ND more likely. It is simply ignorant not to acknowledge that. Are Glocks unsafe? No. But they are far less forgiving of human error, and we are ALL human and DO make errors.

    I'm glad Mas responded. The "I'm not Rambo" response is exactly the problem. MOST gun owners are minimally (at best) proficient in the use of their weapons. I see them at the range and in gunshops all the time. For those people, a striker fired safety-less pistol is a TERRIBLE choice. Yet the media (advertising by the companies calling their product perfection), the proliferation of them in movies (how many bought a model 29 after Dirty harry or a Beretta 92 after Die Hard?), rap songs, and their adoption by police agencies (Give me a Glock. The FBI uses them so they must be the best) has insured that they are big sellers. I mean, these guns are actually marketed to the inexperienced shooter! "No safety lever to fumble with!" like it's such a hardship!

    Finally, the strongest advocates for them are generally younger shooters who grew up with them. The Glock has been around nearly 30 years now. These shooters know nothing else. They actually believe "a safety can get you killed" despite ZERO evidence to support that, while ignoring the MOUNTAINS of evidence that actually SUPPORTS a safety has saved countless lives. They remind me of a child sticking his fingers in his ears and saying "NAH NAH NAH! I CAN'T HEAR YOU!"
     
  2. Homerboy

    Homerboy Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2007
    Messages:
    671
    Location:
    NE Pennsylvania
    Test Pilot, I have never needed a pill that bad, but I am sure a person experiencing a heart attack and needed his medication did.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 7, 2014
  3. TestPilot

    TestPilot Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Messages:
    976
    I did not see a single person who stated in this thread that Glock of M&P is superior to 1911, M92FS, etc.

    My position is that neither cannot be generalized as better because the addition of more buttons or levers that need manual manipulation intended for safety comes with their own set of risk.

    You keep distorting other's position that only suggests a risk to absolutes.

    You accuse others of claiming Glock, M&P, etc., are superior, which no one did. However, it is actually you who are indirectly, but clearly, claiming that 1911, Beretta M92, etc., are superior.

    How so? You claim those added buttons and levers only have benefits, but absolutely deny that there is any risk associated with it. If you claim there are only benefits and zero risks and not having them has risks, then there is no logical conclusion other than that you are claiming it is superior.

    It's not that one person's reasoning which is different that mine is such a big matter to me. However, if that line of reasoning is popularized, then it would lead to mandates. That is just how we got mandated magazine disconnects, mandated loaded chamber indicators, etc. The line of reasoning is, "Hey, they call it 'safety,' so having more of it must be a good thing" which is far from the truth. And, that kind of public perception leads to policies that makes people suffer.
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2014
  4. TestPilot

    TestPilot Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Messages:
    976
    Then the "safety cap" surely does come at a risk, does it not?
     
  5. TestPilot

    TestPilot Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Messages:
    976
    So, let me get this straight.

    When people fail the manipulation of the lever, you blame lack of training.

    AT THE SAME TIME, you claim as if the manipulation is not "such a hardship" for them.

    AT THE SAME TIME, you claim pistols lacking the lever is a bad thing for people lacking training.

    Is it so hard to accept that both type of pistols have their own set of risks and benefits rather than using paradox logic to feel better about your choice?
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2014
  6. Homerboy

    Homerboy Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2007
    Messages:
    671
    Location:
    NE Pennsylvania
    No. I am saying that lack of training either way is a bad thing. But since 99.999% of people who own a gun will never actually use them in a real situation the lack of training in forgetting to disengage a safety will almost certainly never cause an injury or death. This is what Massad Ayoob does for a living. In decades of research he found ONE where a safety caused a person to not be able to return fire. The inexperience of that shooter might have made the safety a non-issue either way. Who is to say he would have even hit hit target anyway? But the stats do show that a lack of a safety has caused injuries. I can find dozens.

    And the whole "my finger is my safety" mantra is a direct endorsement of safety less weapons and a clear statement of their uselessness on a weapon
    And you know it.
     
  7. Homerboy

    Homerboy Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2007
    Messages:
    671
    Location:
    NE Pennsylvania
    Yeah. The safety cap comes at a risk. But since the odds are much higher that a kid will eat daddy's Percocet or drink the pine sol over somebody needing that pill quickly we accept the cap as a necessary device

    But mall ninjas everywhere are convinced that safety is going to get them killed
     
  8. meef

    meef Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,649
    Location:
    Oregon
    Yeah. But what does he know anyway.

    On the other hand, we've got some real experts here with opinions formulated from.... well, speculation?
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2014
  9. TarDevil

    TarDevil Member

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2009
    Messages:
    1,836
    Location:
    NC Coast
    Video games... internet searches.

    Once in a while they find pictures of dead cops as evidence...
    Oh wait... he wasn't really dead.

    Like I said earlier, it's refreshing and enlightening when genuine professionals make their voices heard, a number of good voices even prior to Mas. But to use Mas as an example, it's all between his ears because he's lived it, seen it, done it, knows it. The video/internet junkies say "I'll get back to you" and go do their Google thing only to find what Mas already has in his head, except his analysis is truthful, objective, logical and based on life.

    I salute the pros, and stand ready to learn from you.
     
  10. TestPilot

    TestPilot Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2006
    Messages:
    976
    Priority in a gear's performace should go to how it performs when needed than how it does not perform when not needed.

    Also, if you approach statistics in the way of your reasoning, then since 99.999% will never actually use them, according to you, and those who do meet criminals did not need to fire in vast majority of cases, you might as well just have a fake pistol to be even more safe. That way there is really no accidental discharge danger.
     
  11. jrdolall

    jrdolall Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2012
    Messages:
    2,695
    Location:
    Southeast
    I have been preaching for 40 years that the finger is the primary safety on EVERY gun ever made. I have no doubt that there have been accidents in which the trigger wasn't pulled but those are few and far between.

    I took a lady shooting this weekend that had never handled a lot of pistols though she had been deer and dove hunting for quite a few years and was comfortable with rifles and shotguns. I handed her a Walther, unloaded and not even a mag inserted, and the first thing she did was curl that finger on the trigger. It just seems to be an automatic movement for a new shooter and has to be worked out with practice.
     
  12. Old Dog

    Old Dog Member

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2004
    Messages:
    7,769
    Location:
    Back on Puget Sound
    If that is not what you're implying in your numerous, over-wordy posts, then there would be no disagreement, eh? Review your own post #26, among others.
    Since you seemed to be responding to one of my posts, I think you may have confused some others' posts with mine.

    Now would be the time for you to go back a do some research on how three states mandated some of these features. That "line of reasoning" was never "popularized" -- unless you consider the actions of a few rogue politicians to be the will of the people, few of whom actually even understand these mechanical functions. The features you describe were pretty much invented by firearms manufacturers prior to any political interference.
     
  13. Sam1911

    Sam1911 Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    Messages:
    34,962
    Location:
    Central PA
    [Ahem...please, no more "internet junkie" or "mall ninja" type insinuations or semi-veiled epithets about each other. Take on a more respectful tone to each other -- even/especially if you disagree -- or ... !]
     
  14. Master Blaster

    Master Blaster Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    5,413
    Location:
    Delaware home of tax free shopping
    Thanks Old Dog I think that was the whole point of the initial post.

    I know it was the point of my contribution about the three rules.

    Nuff Said.
     
  15. JRH6856

    JRH6856 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2011
    Messages:
    3,828
    Location:
    Flower Mound, TX
    We are all creatures of habit. Training can create good habits and break bad ones. Or vice-versa—it depends on how you train. Either way, in a crisis, we will do what we have trained ourselves to do, good or bad. Everything else is just rhetoric.

    (Master Blaster, I don't discount the 3 rules. They are important but not intuitively applicable to all situations. Situational training makes their application intuitive and reinforces their importance.)
     
  16. Nom de Forum

    Nom de Forum Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2008
    Messages:
    2,756
    Location:
    Arizona
    Thank you Sam1911.

    Guys please heed Sam1911's warning. Now that Massad Ayoob has weighed in I am taking my time to carefully craft my next post. I greatly appreciate Mr. Ayoob's life work and feel any response requires I take my time to make the best effort possible in reply. I have been reviewing posts to this thread and the previous similar thread prior to making that reply. I would appreciate it if we could manage to keep this thread open until I can make my next post.

    Thanking you in advance for your courtesy toward all and patience with me.
     
  17. RX-79G

    RX-79G Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2013
    Messages:
    1,808
    As the provocateur in this thread, I will attempt to clarify my earlier statements more concisely:

    1. Human beings are fallible, so we create machines that aren't just easy to use, but attempt to cover our butts when we do, eventually, err.

    2. The military, aviation and other well developed, high risk, fast paced pursuits utilize devices that increase the amount of deliberate action required to engage a dangerous mechanism. That includes guarded trigger systems on fighter planes that have to be worked with in the middle of the fight.

    3. Devices that require deliberate action can be sequential: Cocking a hammer, moving a safety lever. Or they can involve an amount of mechanical movement or force that makes the requires deliberate action by the user, like a DA trigger.

    4. Until the '80s, all guns that were carried loaded required some sort of deliberate action as a fail safe against human error. Glocks and other light triggered guns can be fired with very little force and a single order of operation, removing much of that previous deliberateness.


    There is no functional difference between carrying an XD or Glock loaded or carrying a Series 80 1911 with the safety off. All are realistically Condition Zero carry and rely entirely (instead of predominantly) on user infallibility to prevent NDs.


    This is a largely civilian/consumer philosophy, not accepted by the military. Keep in mind that one of the primary features our military looked for in a 1911 replacement (XM9) was a gun they considered safe to carry with a round in the chamber for standard troops - something the 1911 was not considered to offer.


    Good gun handling practice is ALWAYS going to be the primary thing preventing NDs. The purpose of long accepted DA triggers and manual safeties is to guard against that last few percent of gun safety that humans are incapable of. Safety-less guns with pre-sprung or pre-cocked trigger systems remove this extra insurance against accidental death without offering a replacement. The NRA safety procedures existed before Glocks, and their relevance didn't change in 1982.

    Condition Zero and good trigger discipline is wishful thinking, not a plan.
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2014
  18. Homerboy

    Homerboy Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2007
    Messages:
    671
    Location:
    NE Pennsylvania
    Test pilot, you twist everything to fit your logic but offer nothing but theory. 99.99% of us will never use a in. Gun for defense. You base your distrust of safeties on that minuscule chance that you will be that .001% and if you are that you will fail to disengage the safety. There are documented cases where a safety saved a life. There is ONE when somebody who admitted he spent zero time practicing.

    People who are so vehemently against safeties are obviously people who do not want to devote the time to train.

    25 years of driving and never needed an airbag. Doesn't mean I'm not glad to have one. You remind me of people who say a seatbelt will keep them trapped in a burning car so they won't use them despite the fact that MOST people are saved by them
     
  19. Sam1911

    Sam1911 Moderator Emeritus

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2007
    Messages:
    34,962
    Location:
    Central PA
    See, when we have these debates, this kind of statement muddies the waters rather than clearing them:

    This is not something you can say with any credibility or validity. All your other points can be expressed as either fact or opinion, but this one cannot. It is simply false.

    I know many people who train extensively (or are even trainers themselves!) and are something like what you'd probably call "vehemently" against external, manual, safeties. I know many who practice and train lots and who prefer them (though that seems to be a declining percentage). I know MANY, MANY (like myself) who shoot, train, and practice very regularly and who really don't have a preference.

    (In my case, any, just so long as it isn't DA/SA. :))

    So debate (if there's anything left here to present on either side) but don't make absolutist comments that are demonstrably incorrect as part of your case.
     
  20. RX-79G

    RX-79G Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2013
    Messages:
    1,808
    I don't personally care for safety levers, and not because I don't want to train. I just conceive of situations where the safety might become difficult to remove, and I don't see the downside of DA triggers for self defense.

    So the upside of using a safety - a lighter trigger pull - isn't a good balance for the downside - a potential barrier to being able to use the gun. I just don't need a target trigger for defense.
     
  21. meef

    meef Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2004
    Messages:
    1,649
    Location:
    Oregon
    Just curious....

    Is the purpose of this thread (and the previous monstrosity that it somewhat closely resembles) to:

    a.) demonstrate that one type of pistol configuration (with/without manually engaged/released safety) is superior to the other

    b.) convince the opposing point of view of the superiority of your preference of pistol safety configuration, thereby actually changing their opinion/world view (har har)

    c.) instruct newcomers how to choose the superior (aka your personal preference) safety configuration based upon the most wordy and redundant argument(s) imaginable stating/justifying said superiority

    d.) burn up a lot of spare time and energy engaging in internet debate (my personal favorite)

    e.) or something else entirely

    :confused:

    :rolleyes:
     
  22. RX-79G

    RX-79G Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2013
    Messages:
    1,808
    The (hidden) purpose of this thread appeared to be emphasizing the Glock point of view on safety devices, albeit couched in the guise of good training leads to good discipline.

    The thread has become an argument about the opposite point of view: If something more than pure discipline is necessary - what device and why?
     
  23. Mike1234567

    Mike1234567 member

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2010
    Messages:
    4,084
    Location:
    Alamo City
    You're joking, right? What I mean is... our LEOs should be VERY well trained with the firearm(s) they carry and, if they're not, it's the fault of the LEO, their Training Officer and their Commander. EXTREME negligence on all accounts.
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2014
  24. danez71

    danez71 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2009
    Messages:
    5,074
    Location:
    CA,AZ,CA,TX


    This is what the OP said:


    So lets take a look down memory lane in this thread ... back to page 2... and see what else the OP says:



    That's right... even though he admits that he doesn't have anything concrete, after 3 decades of research he's " .....arguing the counterintuitive idea that they don't necessarily make pistols safer.

    :scrutiny:
     
  25. JRH6856

    JRH6856 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2011
    Messages:
    3,828
    Location:
    Flower Mound, TX
    ^^^^OK, that supports option d.) burn up a lot of spare time and energy engaging in internet debate
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice