stryker pistols

[Jim Watson]

In the 1970s, an article in The Handgunner, Ltd. about the then new German police pistoles said "current training emphasizes the convulsive response." Summarized in the Colonies as "yank and crank."

Two of them, Sig P6 and Walther P5 are DA-SA, as safe to start with as a revolver, but the HK P7 can get pretty lively.

 

[.455_Hunter]

Well, to be realistic, when the double action revolver was the "standard" carry firearm, there were no safeties either.

So, what's the big deal?

(Besides, with the DA/SA semi-auto pistol, the intent was to carry them loaded with the safety off, so again, what's the big deal?)

A full-stroke, full-weight, traditional DA trigger has no comparison to common striker triggers on the market today. Many of these current triggers are far more similar to a unlocked, safety-pinned Series 80 1911 than a decocked Model 10 or Sig P226.

 

[The Night Rider]

Just an odd sidenote here:

No matter which type of handgun (or rifle ?) Israelis use, they are always carried with an Empty Chamber, unless this has changed in the last five years or so.

Yes, it has changed in the last 5 years or so. Name me a police force in the United States that currently carries their sidearms unloaded

 

[DT Guy]

Trigger pull numbers.

Which only counts if you plan to pull the trigger 'a little' when you don't mean to shoot.

Larry

 

[jar]

Which only counts if you plan to pull the trigger 'a little' when you don't mean to shoot.

Larry

Or accidentally catch it or a kid plays with it of it snags when holstering or ...

Lots of folk seem to like such systems.

 

[.455_Hunter]

Or accidentally catch it or a kid plays with it of it snags when holstering or ...

Lots of folk seem to like such systems.

Yes- It's the inadvertent impingement on the trigger that is the concern when you are NOT actually planning on firing. It only has to happen once for a life-changing event, and modern striker triggers help to facilitate such an occurrence.

 

[The Night Rider]

Striker-fired pistol with a manual safety requires extra machining, extra parts and extra labor to assemble it.

Even if it only adds an extra penny per unit to the manufacturer's cost, if you're manufacturing 100,000 guns it adds up

 

[.455_Hunter]

I understand the concept of not wanting a safety on a defensive handgun- it makes perfect sense. However, that means the trigger should provide a high margin against inadvertent activation.

 

[FL-NC]

I like striker fired pistols like the Glock because they are extremely reliable, not prohibitively expensive, and have a consistent and manageable trigger. The absence of the manual safety /off switch doesn't bother me. With proper training and using the basics of firearm safety, and a proper holster, they are extremely safe pistols. For those who desire an off switch on their pistol, there are guns like the S&W M&P and the new Sig that offer this feature.
As an instructor working with people less familiar with handguns, designs like the Glock are much easier to train others with. Transitional DA pistols like the M9 are the worst. The M1911 is a fine pistol, but in my experience, that pistol and the 45 ACP round it normally fires is best used in the hands of someone more experienced than most shooters, with that shooter willing to put more effort/time/ammunition into sustaining his or her level of proficiency.

 

[FL-NC]

I understand the concept of not wanting a safety on a defensive handgun- it makes perfect sense. However, that means the trigger should provide a high margin against inadvertent activation.

It won't fire without a finger on it, and that finger shouldn't be there until its time to fire.

 

[FL-NC]

For my situation, I am more concerned about an unintended discharge than I am about getting the gun into action quickly

Training is what prevents this from being a thing

Now it's a matter of retraining, but no harm in swiping a safety lever that is no longer there.
/QUOTE]
Like you said- training.

 

[.455_Hunter]

It won't fire without a finger on it, and that finger shouldn't be there until its time to fire.

It's not fingers that concern me. It's all the other the things that OCCASIONALLY find a way to mimic the action of a finger, and a typical modern striker trigger is more susceptible to such an incursion. The jacket cinch that just happens to snag in the trigger guard of your safety-less P320 during a re-holster is more problematic than the same cinch snagging in the trigger guard of a decocked P226 or P99AS. Why do we facilitate Mr. Murphy's misadventures?

 

[12Bravo20]

Training is what prevents this from being a thing

I agree 100% that training is very important.

I grew up shooing single action revolvers and 1911s. I also had a lot of training with the 1911 while in the Army. Sweeping the safety off as you draw becomes second nature with enough training. And it doesn't hurt one bit to sweep the safety on pistol without a safety. I still sweep the safety on my Glocks and other striker fired pistols. It doesn't slow me down a bit when drawing from the holster and bringing the pistol up to aim/shoot.

For my situation, I am more concerned about an unintended discharge than I am about getting the gun into action quickly, so I prefer the option of using a manual safety. Now that you have a gun without the manual safety, you no longer have that "two factor authentication"

With Glock pistols, there are three safeties built into them. You have the trigger safety shoe, firing pin safety plunger, and the striker/trigger cruciform is made so that the cruciform will not release the striker if the pistol is dropped.

If a Glock happens to fail the drop safety test, then there is something wrong with it. And even with a failure of the drop test, the firing pin safety plunger is designed to stop the firing pin from going forward as long as the trigger is not pulled. Which brings me to another subject concerning Glock pistols. I cringe when people change out the firing pin spring, firing pin safety plunger spring and trigger spring for lighter spring. That lead to functioning issues and possible safety issues.

 

[FL-NC]

No matter which type of handgun (or rifle ?) Israelis use, they are always carried with an Empty Chamber, unless this has changed in the last five years or so.
I know that the Israelis (at least in some units) are in love with this TTP, and I think it is horrible and inefficient. The only good reason I can come up with this is risk aversion or lack of confidence in the level of trigger discipline of the users- maybe it is a holdover from older pistol designs. In any case, I think it is tactical folly.

The guy who instructed our "mall shooter class", Ben Goldstein, served in the IAF and then worked in private security. He showed a technique they use to chamber a round after drawing the handgun.

I bet it is a lot slower to get rounds on target than having a round chambered, and I bet it takes 2 hands to get it done. Also louder- remember, just because you drew the pistol doesn't mean you need to fire it "right now". I have often wondered- after the user draws the piece, chambers the round, and fires it (or doesn't) is the user expected to re-configure the pistol into the "empty chamber carry mode"? That is even more inefficient than the presentation technique, and requires some fine motor skills that may not be at their best in the moment. If the user opts to just re-holstering the pistol with the round in the chamber- what was the point in the first place?

I would hate to carry a gun with an empty chamber, and then need to move a Safety lever also. Their LEO "turn-in" (like my S&W 6904) handguns all seem to be DA/SA.

I would never do it (carry a pistol on an empty chamber). Although the safety on the cocked and locked 1911 is pretty user friendly if it is fitted properly. I think that part of the reason there are so many LEO turn-ins like your 6904 is that they are becoming phased out in favor of designs like the Glock and M&P.

 

[FL-NC]

It's not fingers that concern me. It's all the other the things that OCCASIONALLY find a way to mimic the action of a finger, and a typical modern striker trigger is more susceptible to such an incursion. The jacket cinch that just happens to snag in the trigger guard of your safety-less P320 during a re-holster is more problematic than the same cinch snagging in the trigger guard of a decocked P226 or P99AS. Why do we facilitate Mr. Murphy's misadventures?

I have seen bullets make their way out of the muzzle of a M9 pistol and through a holster a few times (and sometimes into the leg) of a user who had this same thing happen after said user neglected to de-cock the M9 pistol prior to re-holstering. No design is 100% fool-proof, unless of course the gun has been rendered incapable of firing at all. I have also found that if a fool is in possession of a firearm and just given a few seconds of unsupervised access to it, the odds of a mishap go up astronomically. The amount of holes in the wall and floor around clearing barrels in the military prove this- that not only did the user neglect to properly clear the weapon, he/she didn't even hit the barrel. All with the M9 pistol, BTW.

 

[.455_Hunter]

I have seen bullets make their way out of the muzzle of a M9 pistol and through a holster a few times (and sometimes into the leg) of a user who had this same thing happen after said user neglected to de-cock the M9 pistol prior to re-holstering. No design is 100% fool-proof, unless of course the gun has been rendered incapable of firing at all. I have also found that if a fool is in possession of a firearm and just given a few seconds of unsupervised access to it, the odds of a mishap go up astronomically. The amount of holes in the wall and floor around clearing barrels in the military prove this- that not only did the user neglect to properly clear the weapon, he/she didn't even hit the barrel. All with the M9 pistol, BTW.

I agree that training is needed for all platforms, and nothing 100% fool-proof. I also have active duty experience with the M9, and yes, some folks would have been best served with a 92D variant or a rubber duck. The problem with most striker guns is that they are not dissimilar to that cocked M9 in their standard carry condition, and the M17/18 presents the same issue if the safety is neglected.

 

[bdickens]

It's not fingers that concern me. It's all the other the things that OCCASIONALLY find a way to mimic the action of a finger, and a typical modern striker trigger is more susceptible to such an incursion. The jacket cinch that just happens to snag in the trigger guard of your safety-less P320 during a re-holster is more problematic than the same cinch snagging in the trigger guard of a decocked P226 or P99AS. Why do we facilitate Mr. Murphy's misadventures?

That's why you need to be PAYING ATTENTION TO WHAT THE HELL YOU ARE DOING!

 

[rust collector]

Training is what prevents this from being a thing

And yet Glocks keep going off by themselves (ie unintended discharges). Training is wonderful, multiple safeties are wonderful, and yet failure happens. Use the system that works for you.

 

[.455_Hunter]

That's why you need to be PAYING ATTENTION TO WHAT THE HELL YOU ARE DOING!

Unfortunately, in the real world, unintended incidents happen, regardless of training, skill set, or attitude.

 

[LiveLife]

OK, I'm old school, 68, veteran, lifetime shooter ... 1911 person

....why are stryker pistols all the rage now? I dont understand why no manual safetys hardly anymore.

Same here, I too am old school at 56, learned to appreciate 1911s in the Army after volunteered to work in our unit's armory in the 80s as a medic.

When I first handled Glock I went, "Who is crazy enough to make a gun out of plastic? Good grief ... this fad won't last."

So after Army, I started shooting USPSA matches and my bullseye match shooting mentor taught me to build my match 1911 doing all the gunsmith work with diamond files, one day another match shooter offered for me to shoot his Glock 17. Well, I got faster stage time than my Sig P226 with a "plastic" gun I never shot. In disbelief I ran the stage again and my stage time got faster and faster with same tight double taps on targets.

Long story short, I switched to Glock 17 and eventually bought two Glock 22s to continue shooting USPSA while better meeting major/minor power factor requirements.

Don't get me wrong, I still like 1911s and bought railed Sig 1911 when I couldn't buy one of 250 Dan Wesson PM7s made for CA each year.

And don't worry about no external safety on polymer striker pistols ... it's the new thing. Treat it like revolvers where the "trigger finger" is the safety. If it was an issue, we would hear news reports of no external safety pistols killing gun owners on a regular basis.

 

[Kleanbore]

It's not fingers that concern me. It's all the other the things that OCCASIONALLY find a way to mimic the action of a finger, and a typical modern striker trigger is more susceptible to such an incursion. The jacket cinch that just happens to snag in the trigger guard of your safety-less P320 during a re-holster is more problematic than the same cinch snagging in the trigger guard of a decocked P226 or P99AS.

I have the same concern. I prefer a pistol with a grip safety.

 

[Ethan Verity]

Because if you don't pull the trigger, the gun won't go off... so why have extra switches that first need to be flicked to make the gun work? Trigger discipline, safe gun handling, and a secure holster have all eliminated the need for a switch that disables the trigger.

The gun may not have such a manual switch, but it is still mechanically safe. The scissor-trigger and firing pin block keep the gun from firing (unless the trigger is pulled).. so if you drop that gun and it goes bouncing across the floor, it's not going to fire.

 

[JR24]

It's not fingers that concern me. It's all the other the things that OCCASIONALLY find a way to mimic the action of a finger, and a typical modern striker trigger is more susceptible to such an incursion. The jacket cinch that just happens to snag in the trigger guard of your safety-less P320 during a re-holster is more problematic than the same cinch snagging in the trigger guard of a decocked P226 or P99AS. Why do we facilitate Mr. Murphy's misadventures?

For someone like an LEO who might need to unholster regularly numerous times a day, sometimes under stress I agree, it’s certainly a concern.

But for a CCW it’s significantly less concerning since folks shouldn’t be playing with their guns so much, and do all their holstering in a careful and controlled way. That’s not just training, it’s treating a firearm with the respect it’s due.

I certainly read often enough on gun forums folks simply playing with their guns too much, sure they will have reasons for why they do what they do, but the reality is there are so many holster options that conceal well and can be removed with the gun that there is very little reason to have your CCW out of its holster on any regular basis, and if it stay secure in a quality holster, there’s much less concern for safety features.

edit: not that I have a problem with safeties or even DAO or DA/SA. All are fine with me, as long as one practices properly and carefully.

 

[Hikingman]

Built-in Safety?
In my world which also includes a 1911 Government model, it comes down to 2 questions.

1. Do you keep up with your firearms whether loaded or empty?
2. Do you have grandchildren or others/ youths that may get their hands on your firearms without you being aware of this?

For me it's a yes to keeping up with any and all of them, and no other person has access to them. My CC has a decocker- only!

 

[mcb]

Other than my Ruger MkII and double stack 1911 none of my handguns have a manual safety. I don't believe I would carry a handgun with a manual safety. Nothing wrong with a manual safety but after years and years of training, competing, and carrying a handgun without a manual safety it would take considerable training effort to ensure muscle memory would not forget the safety in a high-stakes situations. Good trigger finger and holster discipline has taking the place of a manual safety very well for years.