stupid question of the week: S&W Shield safety removal?

[1KPerDay]

I always assumed them wonderful five-shot S&W J-framed revolvers with lightened frames were for physically fit people enjoying active lifestyle. Now that Federal makes them Micro .38 defensive loads where entire bullet is inside case like with them fancy smacy target loads the situation is even better. I submit the Shield is not suitable for young fit lass and belongs in hands of weakling "cauch potatoes". Oh by the way that "plastic trigger condom with the shoe string" is about the strangest thing I have seen. I admit it's probably more profitable than selling sheet metal boxes with springs called magazines for $30 or more.

You are good at making assumptions lately, but you know what they say about assumptions. She and I tried shooting a J frame extensively and she preferred the Shield. We also tried a S&W M10, Kahr PM9, Kel-Tec PF-9, Glock 23, Glock 43, and SIG P230. She shoots the shield best, prefers the size and grip of the Shield. Thank you for your continued, unwarranted snarkiness but you can go bother someone else now. Thank you, drive through

 

[olafhardtB]

Just curious. When you all tried all those guns to find her favorite, did she load them starting with cartridges out of the box, rack the slides etc? This is where I see the advantage of revolvers. I have weak hands. Stuffing magazines, racking slides etc is really hard for me. I think I could go through a box of 50 with a j frame faster than with a Shield starting with loose cartridges. I favor starting new shooters with loose cartridges and an empty gun. BTW I am a 6'4" 250 lb male and not considered very delicate.

 

[1KPerDay]

good points, and yes, she loaded, unloaded, etc. Revolvers are certainly easier to load. Not that easy to actually hit anything with a J frame with a 12-lb DAO trigger, though. They are often recommended to ladies but I'd consider them an expert's/experienced shooter's weapon. The polymer framed variants are a little better, with lighter triggers and less felt recoil. A scandium-framed .357? I'd think really hard before pressing the trigger on that one. Maybe if a bear were actually chewing on my arm.

 

[wally]

A scandium-framed .357? I'd think really hard before pressing the trigger on that one.

I carry one sometimes -- it'll hurt them a lot more than it'll hurt you! I shot 25 rounds through it once sighting in and verifying the laser grips held zero. Not a range toy! Its a handful with .38 Special +P.

 

[PabloJ]

I carry one sometimes -- it'll hurt them a lot more than it'll hurt you! I shot 25 rounds through it once sighting in and verifying the laser grips held zero. Not a range toy! Its a handful with .38 Special +P.

Light alloy five shot revolver is very useful for couple of things like BUG ankle carry and people jogging, hiking,...... The problem is most are amateurs and "mentally shoot themselves in their feet" by making poor ammo selections. As I mentioned Federal did them a favor by introducing "Micro" defense load in .38 Special available of all places at Walmart. These people keep trying to stuff 12oz to 14oz revolvers with stupid +P ammo and .357 ammo which is ill-suted for such guns. The only reason S&W chambered and marked them .357 is too sell more of their guns.

 

[1KPerDay]

Just ordered the non-safety version. $288 shipped with 2 free 8 rd mags. Good deal IMO, even though I missed the rebates

 

[ritepath]

Never figured out how folks ride bikes or run with a gun as large and heavy as the Shield. IMHO it's LCPII time.

 

[olafhardtB]

Not trying to change your mind, just relate data from an experienced point of view from a shooter with weakened hands. Double action revolvers require that the index finger add its strength to the GRIPPING strength of the firing hand. In my own case the ring finger on my right hand was injured so that it doesn't close well. If a gun does not allow the pinky to grip, this only leaves my large finger to grip plus any help it gets from the trigger finger, I have read reports of women shooting better double action than single. Also with a little practice I learned to use BOTH index fingers at oonce to pull the trrigger. As a bonus this seems to eliminate the tendancy to pull the gun to the side when pulling the trigger. I now shoot reevolvers mostly double action. BTW I bought my sister a gun and taught her how to shoot it. That seems to have forged a special bond between us that she doesn't have with our other two brothers. It astonished both of them and they acted slightly appalled. She and I howled with laughter at their reactions.

 

[shafter]

Never figured out how folks ride bikes or run with a gun as large and heavy as the Shield. IMHO it's LCPII time.

I imagine that would be one tough gun to shoot after running a few miles.

 

[1KPerDay]

Never figured out how folks ride bikes or run with a gun as large and heavy as the Shield. IMHO it's LCPII time.

She hated shooting the LCP is one reason, and she's concerned about bears for another. With 147 HCFP +p 9mms at least she'll be able to piss the bear off really good before it eats her.

 

[hdwhit]

With 147 HCFP +p 9mms at least she'll be able to piss the bear off really good before it eats her.

To know that you really angered the bear as it chomps on your liver is a great deal of comfort, I'm sure.

 

[hdwhit]

Frankl03 wrote:
I wouldn't alter a carry gun at all. If your sister ended up using it defend herself...In court she may have to explain why the gun was altered etc.

This is a very good point and something to keep in mind.

And in evaluating it, you must keep in mind that what was in your mind or what was in your sister's mind is irrelevant. The only thing that is relevant is what the jury can be made to believe was in the mind of you and your sister by the opposing counsel. Think what the other side's attorney can make of the fact that you've already posted just on this thread that your sister hasn't trained to disengage the safety upon the draw (well, then, Mr. 1K, why didn't you and your sister retrain?), the best course of action is to buy the non-safety variant (but why didn't you just do that - at least at first?), the safety button is too small, fiddly and stiff (so, Mr. 1K, what you're telling us is that the split-second it would take to disengage the safety was too much of an interruption for you to tolerate in getting on with shooting the victim? Objection made by your sister's attorney. Withdrawn by the victim's attorney. But how do you take that exchange out of the jury's head?).

Think that line of cross examination might lead someone on the jury to think that maybe you were pressuring your sister to carry a dangerously modified gun and she acquiesced? If so, then she's about to be found guilty of a crime and you're about to be served with papers in a civil suit you probably cannot win. That's why you DON'T modify an EDC pistol.

 

[danez71]

This is goten a bit off topic but....


Unless you're claiming an AD, in a SD shooting you're in fact claiming that you intended to shoot, because you feared for your life.

Safety or not, modified or not, you intended to shoot.

The crux of the case is whether or not you were justified.

Ive never heard of a SD shooting case that didn't hinge on whether or not the shooter was justified.

Even Harold Fish... sure they did make a big deal about the fact he used 10mm ammo (so deadly), but ultimately decided on the circumstances of if it was justified.


Having said that, the comment about the jury is very valid and much in life is about calculated risk decision making and everyone needs to make there own decision.