Today in my class...

[Tory]

When you're WRONG, admit it!

And I was - about the decocker, that is.

It is just that; a decocker. Anything which does not prevent the firearm from being fired cannot constitute a safety.

 

[cordex]

Well...the cop described that there was most likely a struggle and he was killed. The teacher mentioned how a finger print system on the gun could have prevented that.

Did you bring up the fact that whenever a bill regarding requiring "smart gun" type technology is introduced, it always contains wording exempting police officers at the insistance of police unions?

 

[ckyllo]

doesnt a company make a refit safety for the Glock? thought I saw one last year. might solve the problem or at least give the officer the option.

 

[peacefuljeffrey]

I then raise my hand and asked if the lack of an external safety on the Glock that he carries and that the Butler officer most likely carried had a direct result in the ability of the perp to easily fire off a shot.

He then goes into the pro-glock safety rhetoric saying how the gun won't fire when dropped out of an airplane.

After he finishes with that I say, well the Glock Safe Action safety is very successful in preventing accidental firing when dropped, thrown, or bumped...and I ask him if the fact that there is not a single external safety to stop any person from grabbing the gun, pulling the trigger, and subsequently firing off a round is a contributing factor to officers being killed by their own firearm. He then said that he is not aware of a pistol with an external safety and his old service revolver did not.

I said well...the Beretta that I carry in the Army has an external safety and the Steyr that I carry on the street has an external safety and so does, 1911 series, HK's, CZ's, and many others.

He said he doesn't think it would make a difference and he would not want to have to worry about a safety in a critical situation.

I then dropped it...wasn't hitting home. I think I might e-mail the reporter though and maybe shine a little firearm education his way. I like Glocks, and everything...but I also like an external safety and that is why I carry a Steyr.

I have nothing against the Steyr, in fact I love it and would like to eventually get one.

But I just for the life of me can't figure out why you wanted to go and heckle/harass the cop about Glocks.

The fact remains that a gun's safety is NOT meant to prevent unauthorized use! It is not meant even to delay unauthorized use should your gun be taken from you. It is meant to be a safety for the USER, the authorized user, to prevent firing when it is not intended (and we all know that it is NOT the safety to be RELIED on -- TRIGGER CONTROL is).

To argue that an external safety should be relied upon to buy the extra seconds that a cop would need to get his backup gun (if he has one) is specious. There is no guarantee that the criminal perp is going to be delayed by operating a safety. Would the safety even be ON right out of the holster? I don't know what cops generally do in that regard. A Beretta 92/96 is plenty safe even with a round chambered and the manual safety off, so I can't say there aren't cops carrying them around in condition II. (Wait, do I have my conditions right? Hammer down, round chambered, is that II?)

If I were the type to take a cop's gun, and it was a Beretta with the safety on, I'd be able to have it off really quick and the gun brought to bear. It's folly to pin your hopes on the notion that every perp who ever tries to grab a cop's gun hasn't the experience to know how to expeditiously get the safety off.

The gun's safety is NOT DESIGNED TO BE A PREVENTATIVE TO UNAUTHORIZED USE. PERIOD. And it makes no warranty as to effectiveness in DELAYING unauthorized use, either. Period.

-Jeffrey

 

[SAG0282]

Great post Jeffrey, and dead-on.

 

[c_yeager]

A manual safety isnt some device to guard against unauthorized use. Sure, the average joe-on-the-street might take a few extra seconds to disengage it. But, the average joe isnt the one pulling weapons out of police officers' holsters and shooting them. There is no basis at all to state that an external safety would have prevented that shooting.

Cops have never commonly issued weapons with external safeties simply becuase they don't like having to worry about an on/off switch on their firearms.

If anything the story amounts to a cautionary tale for police concerning weapon retention and holster selection.

 

[mfree]

"A manual safety isnt some device to guard against unauthorized use."

Nope, but that extra second sure is handy when you can use it.

Glock:
Cop - *bang*
Criminal - *bang*

1911, cocked and locked
Cop - *click**bang*
Criminal - *fumble* *sounds of criminal being tackled or shot by BUG*

 

[Aguila Blanca]

Cops have never commonly issued weapons with external safeties simply becuase they don't like having to worry about an on/off switch on their firearms.

????

1911s have never been issued to police? I'm sure that's news to Colt and Kimber and Springfield Armory, not to mention Para Ordnance, who are selling a lot of their LDAs to police departments precisely because they DO have a safety.

 

[ScottsGT]

OK, I could have gone with the Sig 1911 as my "Sig with an external safety", but I dropped the ball on that one. I'll take the high road and confess I had a brain fart and got confused with the sigs decocker. And I used to own a 229
From what I remember of the article, if there was a device in place that required the shooter to enguage/disenguage to pull the trigger, it slowed down the person not familiar with that firearm.

 

[CAS700850]

I think, for the truly safety conscious officer, a combination of a retention holster, like the Safariland level III (can't recall the model number), along with a handgun using a manual safety (and I mean using it, keeping teh gun on safe), would be about the best option. If you wanted to add on teh option of the mag safety (drop the mag in a struggle) you could go with a BHP or Smith.

The key is to choose the tools that best suit you, your training, and your situation. Our probation officers all use retention holsters to reduce teh risk of a gun grab, but issue Glocks. They made a choice. So must we all.

 

[Dave R]

I ask him if the fact that there is not a single external safety to stop any person from grabbing the gun, pulling the trigger, and subsequently firing off a round is a contributing factor to officers being killed by their own firearm.

ScottsGT and Mr. Mysterious, I'm with you. I take comfort in my external safety. I don't like Glocks and revolvers for CCW for that reason.

Jeff, you're right. An external safety should not be counted on to prevent unauthorized use of a firearm.

OTOH, the NRA research and my own experience says that anyone who is NOT a serious gunnie (and most bad guys aren't) needs a few seconds to figure out this safety thing. I want those seconds.

 

[Andrew Rothman]

Here's a news story about the police officer shot with his own gun: http://www.indystar.com/articles/9/181545-8799-009.html

The teacher mentioned how a finger print system on the gun could have prevented that.

A student then asked if there was a strap holding the gun in the holster, the cop said no. He then said that he had his own gun taken away once, but luckily had a backup and surprised the criminal.

No offense, but you turned your back on an approaching freight train to swat a fly.

Putting aside the fact that a uniformed cop was carrying without a retention holster of any kind, the teacher brings up "smart guns" as a valid safety measure, and you decide to bust the cop's balls (and it ain't even his department's dead officer) about the University poilce officer carrying a Glock?

You had an opportunity to dispel an important gun-grabber myth, and instead, I believe, came across as a gun know-it-all.

Forest. Trees. You know?

 

[LiquidTension]

While it is true that an external safety is not meant to deter unauthorized use of a firearm, the average hoodlum/scumbag doesn't know as much about firearms as most of the people on this board do. Therefore, it will take most thugs a little while to figure out how to make the gun work...this is time that a LEO can use to his advantage. I recall a few cases where the squeeze cocker on a P7 completely baffled people.

With training and practice, disengaging a manual safety becomes part of your draw, as it has with mine. No time is lost by having the safety, but time is potentially gained by it being there due to the fact that most criminals do not train with various types of weapons; rather, they use whatever they can find on the street. I know there are exceptions, but I refuse to believe that EVERYone with no training can pick up any gun and figure out the safety instantly. Therefore, the point about the manual safety is valid even if it is mostly academic. Will a manual safety save a life in a specific situation? Who knows? But the possibility of being stumped is always greater with a safety than without.

And yet I like Sigs


As for "smart" guns...

 

[c_yeager]

1911s have never been issued to police? I'm sure that's news to Colt and Kimber and Springfield Armory, not to mention Para Ordnance, who are selling a lot of their LDAs to police departments precisely because they DO have a safety.

Yes, if you delete the word "COMMONLY" from my statement then thats what you get. Of course if you were to actually read what was written then you would come to a different conclusion. Name a department that does or has used a 1911 based firearm as their STANDARD issued weapon. I can count them on one hand. That means it isnt common, now doesnt it?

 

[peacefuljeffrey]

ScottsGT and Mr. Mysterious, I'm with you. I take comfort in my external safety. I don't like Glocks and revolvers for CCW for that reason.

Jeff, you're right. An external safety should not be counted on to prevent unauthorized use of a firearm.

OTOH, the NRA research and my own experience says that anyone who is NOT a serious gunnie (and most bad guys aren't) needs a few seconds to figure out this safety thing. I want those seconds.

You know what's funny? Before I owned any guns of my own, and was in high school, my brother came home on leave from the Army with a new Glock 19, and I remember disliking it specifically because I found the idea of "no manual safety" alien and seemingly dangerous. I remember regarding that gun as an AD waiting to happen! And now I LOVE them, and prefer them! (I'm a fiend for simplicity, and fewer parts.)

-Jeffrey