Treading on thin ice: Anyone ever carry a DA/SA pistol with the hammer cocked?

[model 649]

Did your decocker break? If thats why one would carry this way, then get it fixed, or use another gun till it is fixed. This appears to be to be risk with potentially disastrous consequences if you mess up. The worst part, for me, is that THAT type of ND is easily and completely avoidable, especially in fast action. So? was this a trick question?
Josh

 

[Jamie C.]

But it isn't that simple.

You've redefined "double action" from the more conventional definition which was "using the trigger to set and release the striker or hammer" to something subtly different: the trigger is now used to "finish setting and releasing the striker."

Where'd that "finish settting" come from? <grin>

Not gonna argue semantics with you, Walt, or "split hairs".

The fact is, a Glock's trigger is involved with both the cocking of the striker AND releasing that striker. That, by definition, makes it a "true" Double action, albeit one with a very short trigger stroke. What it doesn't make it is a "conventional" double action.

Think about this for a second.... If you take a typical double action revolver... say a Smith & Wesson with the firing pin mounted on the hammer.... then set the hammer up as a rebounding-type hammer with the cocking notch moved back so that the trigger only picked it up if the hammer was in the "rebounded" position.... how would this be different from Glock's system really? Sure, there's no slide to push the hammer back to "rebounded", and it isn't needed because of the rebound spring, but it would certainly behave in the same way as a glock does, if the revolver got dirty enough for the firing pin to stick in the frame and not allow the hammer to return to where it needs to be for the trigger to catch it. You'd have to pull the hammer back manually and "re-set" the system, to get it to work. ( And this whole flaw is probably a good reason why you don't see any "rebounding hammer" revolvers. )
And this type of revolver would also have a shorter trigger stroke, due to the hammer already being partially cocked.


This make any sense to you folks?

J.C.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

The sergeant either got it wrong (probably the case) or you misunderstood.

I guarantee you that NOBODY in the military is required to carry a weapon with a round chambered, hammer cocked, and safety off. You won't even find that in a combat zone. Hammer down, perhaps... With the Berretta, that would be perfectly functional and safe.

(With the M9, you really don't have the option of cocked with safety on...)

As for Jamie C's response, above -- you get the last word. I won't argue further. That doesn't mean I agree, but it's clear I'll not convince you of anything, either.

 

[eab]

I got it wrong, I misunderstood my Sergeant I guess. Looked it up some more

http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cach...cked+cocked+and+loaded&hl=en&client=firefox-a

(post by DMF) and USAF carry round chambered, safty off, hammer down.



My bad

 

[No_Brakes23]

Starting to sound like a trick question here, DA/SA action, no manual safety=Glock

Uhm, that description fits my SIG P232, but it has a decocker. The only time it is gonna have a round in the chamber while cocked is when I am shooting it, or milliseconds before I decock it.

As for carrying the M9 cocked and unlocked... ...that's not the way the Navy or Marine Corps does it, and I bet that's not the way the other three branches do it either. I was taught cocked and locked on the M9. Not callin you out at all, eab, just saying somebody got their info wrong somewhere along the line. The military goes out of its way to prevent NDs, and EVERY SINGLE ONE that occured while I was reading the safety reports was because of a safety violation. Carrying a DAO in that condition is a clear violation of the four rules.

 

[gbran]

Got Hammer?

If the SA/DA has a hammer, you can cock it just as fast as you can decock it. Just as fast as you can release a 1911 safety.

 

[Dienekes]

EAB, it's been a long time since I was a sky cop, but I think somebody was blowing smoke. Small arms proficiency was never a big issue in the USAF and just the thought of herds of minimally trained people running around with cocked and unlocked M9s is enough to give me nightmares. Sorry--I don't believe it.

The only outfits that ever carried cocked and unlocked were supposedly the British and Australian SAS with BHPs, and even that is shrouded in mystery. Those guys are incredibly good at what they do, but it sure would test my faith in the guns themselves and my fellow troopers.

I suppose it would be tiresome to point out that a DA revolver fits in well here if you think you can take care of the problem in six rounds...

 

[coylh]

Really elite special forces carry their 1911's with two rounds chambered, a condom over the barrel, and skateboard tape on the trigger.

 

[BluesBear]

No!

If the SA/DA has a hammer, you can cock it just as fast as you can decock it. Just as fast as you can release a 1911 safety.

Maybe YOU can cock a hammer as fast as YOU can release a 1911 safety.
But for the rest of us on this planet, releasing the 1911 safety is MUCH faster.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

Thumb cock just as fast as you can release a safety?

Obviously written by someone who has never tried it with an electronic timer.

And there's no question as to which method is safer... It isn't thumb-cocking during a rapid, stressful, or contested draw.

 

[rockstar.esq]

Not to Hijack a thread or anything, it just bothers me that there is such an incredible amount of talk surrounding "learning the trigger". I mean talk about overthinking everything! The first pull is harder than the others. How much learning is required? Practice with both, cock the hammer if you've got the time otherwise the only sound should be BOOM. All of this debate seems to stem from some belief that accuracy will be compromised. We are talking about sidearms, and if you are LEO or civilian that mostly means defensive use. As such you don't need 50yd accuracy for an initial "defensive shot". The much lauded 1911 SA platform has it's fans praising it's simple to use safety system and smooth consistant trigger. Why then do we have people freaking out about the trigger on a Glock? The Glock has the easiest safety of any gun I've ever seen. Back to the accuracy thing, 1911 proponents will say their trigger leads to better accuracy. From what I see, the 1911 only gets apprasied based on "combat accuracy". Everything else is held to a different standard. Based on the group sizes I have seen, it seems that the DAO system is best for experts. My DA group sizes are larger than my SA groups but both are small enough to get the job done from a defensive standpoint. Hell I can even manage a perfect group every time if I only fire one shot!

 

[Bobby Lee]

Didn't someone do a study where they found the precocked strikers on Glocks and XDs were able to detonate the primers, even without being pulled all the way back? Can't remember if that's true or not.

The XD is a true single action. The striker is fully cocked and if the striker should somehow fall without a trigger pull, which is not likely, it WILL fire.

The Glock is basically DAO. The striker is not under enough spring pressure when it is carried to fire if somehow the striker fell without a trigger pull which is almost impossible anyway.

The vast majority of modern carry guns are safe no matter if they are SA DA or DAO IF they are carried as they are designed to be carried.

 

[Bobby Lee]

The fact is, a Glock's trigger is involved with both the cocking of the striker AND releasing that striker. That, by definition, makes it a "true" Double action, albeit one with a very short trigger stroke. What it doesn't make it is a "conventional" double action.

So far I have never seen any pistol that could not be classed into the three basic types.

SA DA and DAO.

For some reason some of the newer striker fired autos tend to confuse some but they are all either SA or DA.

The Glock is basically DA because the above quote is 100% correct.

The Springfield XD and the Steyr are SA. They are carried with fully cocked strikers. Their trigger pulls release a fully cocked striker allowing it to fall.

 

[Greymoor]

No Sir,

I carry my P229 uncocked with a round chambered. The 11-12 lbs. trigger pull is a bit of an insurance policy against a casual snag of the trigger while reholstering of drawing the weapon.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

For some reason some of the newer striker fired autos tend to confuse some but they are all either SA or DA.

Its not always confusion. There are subtle differences.

Until Glocks happened on the scene, pulling the trigger on a DA gun did everything.

With one of those traditional DA guns, if you had a round that didn't go bang (hard primer?) pulling the trigger a second time might (if it was just a light strike) make it go bang with the next trigger pull. You've seen it happen with .22s a lot, I'll bet.

Some DA Only semi-autos work that way, whether they're hammer fired or striker-fired. The CZ-75B DAO model does it. As does the CZ-100, which is striker fired. Both of these guns have a "restrike" ability, so they are DAO guns in the "conventional/traditional" sense of the term.

Some "DA Only" guns don't work that way -- and Glocks (and others) are in that group. If the round doesn't go bang, you MUST RACK the slide to make it ready to go bang again -- just as you would with a SA gun (unless you thumb a hammer, if one is available.)

With these guns, THE TRIGGER DOESN'T DO ALL THAT IS REQUIRED TO FIRE THE GUN. If the slide isn't moved (and the hammer can't be pulled back), a second shot isn't possible.

Is that a TRUE DAO gun?

Only if you change the long-standing definition of Double Action to mean something different -- and that's what some here are doing. If you want to chane the definition, then fine -- but don't attribute this difference of opinion and definition in this discussion to a simple matter of "confusion" -- it isn't confusion.

 

[Johnny Guest]

And just a TOUCH of thread veer - -

I understand the topic deals with a DA/SA pistol, but - -

Dienekes in post #32, above, wrote:

The only outfits that ever carried cocked and unlocked were supposedly the British and Australian SAS with BHPs, and even that is shrouded in mystery. Those guys are incredibly good at what they do, but it sure would test my faith in the guns themselves and my fellow troopers.

As mentioned elsewhere, several years back, Col Cooper did comment in one of his columns about Brit SAS carrying BHPs cocked and unlocked. It is worth noting, though - - This was early on in the anti-terrorist operations, while the gear was still being sorted out. If you'll recall, the "modern" incarnation of the long-drop holster, strapped securely to the leg (a la the original 1912 .45 holster) was popularized by the SAS.

Some items to consider:
1. This was all back before the BHP extended thumb safety was readily available, even as an accessory. The old "standard" safety was quite small and a bit difficult to operate at speed.
2.This type holster is normally VERY secure, with a safety strap running across the rear of the slide, between firing pin and hammer. the trigger is also covered.
3. Back then, SAS was considered THE most highly trained and intensively indoctrinated group around. In a military situation, with extremely motivated troops, really strict weapons handling discipline is a viable thing. In such an enviornment, a major safety violation doesn't mean, "Bad letter in your 201 file," or even, "Three day suspension." It can mean being tossed out of the elite group and a return to parent unit in disgrace. Even military court proceedings.
4. I have no documentation of this, but it is logical to think - - These troopies chambered and holstered their sidearms IMMEDIATELY before an "action op" at about the same time they were chambering their MP5s and fusing the breaching charges - - preparing to go in and KILL people in the next little while. They did NOT strut around the NCO club in their tac gear.

Yeah, under THOSE very narrow and restricted conditions, I think cocked-and-unlocked would be viable.

Disclaimer: I own NO insider information. My AFROTC training was long, long ago, in a galaxy far, far away. I have NOT trained with the SAS, Special Forces, SEALs, nor at IMNOC (International Mall Ninja Operations Center.) I just do a lot of reading . . .

Best,
Johnny

PS-- As a footnote - - It is twenty-five years since the Iranian Embassy seige in London, during which SAS came to wide public notice. Interesting information at - -
http://www.dbzworkshop.com/sas.htm

 

[Bobby Lee]

With these guns, THE TRIGGER DOESN'T DO ALL THAT IS REQUIRED TO FIRE THE GUN. If the slide isn't moved (and the hammer can't be pulled back), a second shot isn't possible. Is that a TRUE DAO gun?

How the gun operates when it is unloaded does not make much difference.

My car has power steering but it does not work unless the engine is running.

Using your logic then my car must not have "TRUE" power steering.

 

[Bobby Lee]

These troopies chambered and holstered their sidearms IMMEDIATELY before an "action op" at about the same time they were chambering their MP5s and fusing the breaching charges - - preparing to go in and KILL people in the next little while. They did NOT strut around the NCO club in their tac gear.

They also do not walk around in WalMart looking for dog food and a garden hose with their weapons in that condition.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

How the gun operates when it is unloaded does not make much difference.

My car has power steering but it does not work unless the engine is running.

Using your logic then my car must not have "TRUE" power steering.

Don't know what any of this has to do with power steering or an unloaded gun... The example I cited was a loaded gun that didn't fire properly -- the primer didn't ignite the powder.

But, if HOW the gun OPERATES is the criteria, tell me how a GLOCK differs from a SA Browning?

You rack the slide and pull the trigger in the same way.

You experience the same trigger pull every time with both guns.

If the gun doesn't fire for some reason, the fix is the same for both guns: rack the slide and THEN pull the trigger.

The only practical difference, with the Glock, is that there's no exposed hammer. (The Browning safety is functionally duplicated by the two-stage Glock trigger, although the two safeties sure work in a different ways.)

If the Glock doesn't fire -- what do you have to do to make it fire again?

Simple -- you treat it like its an SA gun, rack the slide, get rid of the bad round, and pull the trigger.

With a true DA gun you'd just pull the trigger again, and it MIGHT ignite the primer. If it didn't work, you'd treat it like a Glock, rack the slide and try again.

Pulling the trigger again would work with a SIG DAO gun, with a SIG using the DAK trigger, with a 75B DAO, and many other guns. It won't work with a Glock or with any SA gun.

You keep implying its simple but your examples/metaphors don't support your argument.

I wonder why folks call the Glock a DAO gun? The more I think about it, the more it looks like a SA, to me.

What's that old saying? Oh, yeah: "if it quacks like a duck and waddles like a duck..."

 

[Jamie C.]

You know, a Double Action revolver doesn't "second strike" a dud cartridge unless you manually roll the cylinder back around to re-position it.

But then again, pulling the trigger on a DA revolver actually does 3 things ( "loads" a cartridge into place to be fired, cocks the hammer back, then drops the hammer ), so maybe it should really be called a "Triple Action revolver.

Honestly, the only "long standing" definition of a "double action" is that pulling the trigger does more than one "job", and only really covers how the gun is designed to work when operating properly. It has nothing to do with the length of pull, or the "weight" of that pull.

And a cartridge not firing is not considered "proper functioning", thus any manual of arms that has to be performed to get it back into action doesn't have any bearing on how that weapon's trigger actually functions.



J.C.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

I agree.

(But remember, too, that if you KEEP pulling the trigger on a revolver, the cylinder WILL roll the dud round into position, again, and if you were having an emergency, it MIGHT just fire that dud round... I've had it happen at the range more than once.)

If we use YOUR definition of action types -- that the action description defines how the gun is designed to work when its operating properly -- I'd argue that the Glock works like a SA gun (except that it can't be decocked.)

 

[trickyasafox]

ill carry cocked locked and ready to rock ONLY if i have had a few drinks to settle my nerves. . . .


WARNIGN EXTREMELY BAD SARCASM

 

[Jamie C.]

If we use YOUR definition of action types -- that the action description defines how the gun is designed to work when its operating properly -- I'd argue that the Glock works like a SA gun (except that it can't be decocked.)

How so? All a SA trigger does is release the hammer or striker. It doesn't have to move that hammer or striker back any at all for it to have enough power to set off the primer. In other words, your finger pulling the trigger doesn't impart any energy for the hammer/striker spring to store, as it does with a Glock.


And for what it's worth, Glock could have set their guns up to "re-strike" a primer quite easily... but it would have been at the cost of a longer trigger stroke, since all that the partial "pre-cocking" that the slide does really accomplishes is to prune down the length of pull.

Want an idea of what that system would behave and feel like? Then go take a good look at the Taurus Millennium and the 24/7. Either one's trigger pull can also be lightened to the same weight as a Glock's is, BTW. It's just a matter of changing out a spring. ( The Millennium and 24/7 use a "simplified" version of Glock's system, without the "shortened pull" option or the internal "safety ramp" that Glocks have. )

Oh, and one other thing... If a person took a 1911 and set it up to have a 3/4 inch trigger stroke that came in at 10 pounds of pull.... wouldn't it still be a single action? Even though it FELT like a double action? ( Only a complete idiot would do this though, in my opinion. )


Anyway, as I said a few posts back, what a gun's trigger pull feels like...weight and stroke length.... has noting to do with whether it's DA or SA, and can be most confusing.


J.C.

 

[natedog]

I don't think having second strike capability is much of an advantage at all, except for range shooting. Let's say you're defending yourself with your DA/SA pistol, and you front sight-press on an assailants torso, and get a click. Are you going to pull the trigger again on a round that's already proved itself to be problematic, that might still not ignite- and then if it doesn't, then rack the slide? I wouldn't, takes too long. It'd be much faster to skip all that and just tap-rack-bang and start fresh. YMMV.

 

[Bobby Lee]

I'd argue that the Glock works like a SA gun (except that it can't be decocked.)

The Glock is only "cocked" when you take up the first stage of the trigger pull.

If one pulls the Glock trigger all the way through the "first stage" but does not pull it the rest of the way through the second stage and releases the trigger then he just "decocked" his Glock.