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

[Walt Sherrill]

The Glock is only "FULLY" cocked when you complete the second part of the trigger stroke. Its similar to some guns that have a half-cock mode.

(My CZs have that option. Starting from half-cock, which is safe because of the firing pin block, shortens the trigger pull and lightens the trigger weight. All of the CZ decocker models START from half-cock.)

In the Glock the striker spring is partially loaded by slide movement, too. With a SA gun, the hammer spring is FULLY loaded by the slide movement. But neither will fire unless the slide has moved first (or you've thumb-cocked the SA gun).

With the DA/SA guns, you can decock and start again without slide movement. Just pull the trigger. You don't have to move the slide.

With most DAO guns you can start agains, too. Just pull the trigger. You don't have to move the slide.

Try that with a SA or Glock.

(Dry fire practice with a Glock is a pain, as a consequence.)

 

[Bobby Lee]

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.

Thank you.

 

[Mark13]

Speaking of the original question....

The chance that you would need to use your pistol to defend yourself is so remote, I mean the military doesn't even do what you are suggesting in war zones, that to carry as you are suggesting is crazy. Perhaps, and I mean this in a good way, anyone considering this should re-evaluate their mindset and whether they should be carrying a gun.

 

[mmike87]

This is just wrong on so many levels. If you want a SA/DA gun that can be SAFELY carried C&L get an HK USP - it has a decocker AND an external safety, so you truly have the best of both worlds.

I would NEVER carry ANY of my SIG's C&L. I shoot better with the DA first shot, anyway.

 

[Dr.Rob]

Yes, sort of... the franken Colt/Seecamp/Viking gun can be de-cocked and the safety applied into a detent... as soon as you start to apply pressure on the DA trigger the safety drops down. In SA mode it works just like a 1911... with a really odd trigger pull.

 

[BluesBear]

It seems that the .45 GAP is more readily accepted than the term safe-action.

Why is it that some people can so readily embrace a new technology yet they INSIST that it be defined with pre-existing terminology?

The Glock self termed "Safe-Action" firing system is NEITHER a traditional double action (DA/SA), traditional double action only (DAO) or traditional single action (SA) system.

Why can some people just accept it and go along with Gaston and refer to it as Safe-Action? Or Hell's Bellsâ„¢ why not just call it Glock Action (GA)?

Just because you insist on calling it something it is not will not make it so. :banghead:

 

[Old Fud]

The original Beretta was What????

I own a 1985 Taurus PT99. I'm told this is the original Beretta "wonder-nine".
i.e. 9mm double-stack DA/SA with frame-mounted ambi-safety. (and the adjustable sights which are the difference between a PT92 and PT99)

The only way you can charge your weapon and set it up to operate "DA" is to pull the trigger on a live round, catch the hammer and gently lower it.

Excuse me???????
Is this what Police officers all across America and every soldier in the past 25 years have been doing in the locker room as they gear up for their daily stint?

This is SAFE???

Or was/is that weapon intended to be carried cocked-and-locked?

Fud

 

[Jamie C.]

It seems that the .45 GAP is more readily accepted than the term safe-action.

Could be because "Safe-Action" is a trade marked marketing term and not an actual mechanical descriptive of how the gun operates. After all, "Safe" is a subjective term, especially where a firearm is concerned.

Why is it that some people can so readily embrace a new technology yet they INSIST that it be defined with pre-existing terminology?

Good question. Especially in light of the fact that a Glock's action is just a slightly different twist on an old system.

Just because you insist on calling it something it is not will not make it so.

That is correct, and pretty much what I've been saying here the whole time.


J.C.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

"Safe-Action" is a trade-marked name clearly developed for marketing purposes. But, the term does describe a slightly DIFFERENT method of making the gun go boom

I've looked around the web and the definitions of DA I've found all say about the same thing, to wit: double action -- a handgun mechanism in which a single pull of the trigger cocks and releases the hammer.

Now of course, we're talking about a semi-auto pistol and not a revolver, and the term can be applied to striker-fired weapons as well as hammer-fired ones.

With a Glock, a single pull of the trigger does not cock and release the striker of a Glock. Don't believe me? With the gun empty and the slide closed, pull the trigger once. If you racked the slide the first time, you'll hear the striker released.

Now, pull the trigger again and tell me what happens...

Try the same drill with a Single Action semi-auto, and tell us what's fundamentally different about those two mechanisms and how they behave.

 

[Jamie C.]

Walt, you seem to be all hung up on the fact that there's no re-strike capability with Glock or other pistols that use this type of mechanism, as if this ability, or lack of it, has some bearing on how the process of dropping the striker actually works when that system is "in battery".

And yes, although this ability is one of the characteristics of a typical or "conventional" DA trigger, it is NOT a defining one.

The fact that a Glock, and this pistol both have a secondary "out of battery" condition ( meaning that having the slide not closed completely is not the only situation that can render the trigger mechanism inoperative ) instead of a "second strike" available, does not affect how that trigger works when "in battery".

As for comparing a SA to a Glock... sure, there's a similarity between a SA and a Glock with an empty chamber, or with the striker down on a "dud" round. So what? It's not designed to function correctly, and as intended, in that condition.
Is it a PIA to perform dry fire practice with? Sure. But it is with a SA gun too. ( I doubt very seriously that any designer takes "dry fire" into consideration when they're designing a pistol. They only want it to work with a live round under the firing pin, and ammo in the mag or cylinder, since what it does when empty isn't part of the "job description." )

You mentioned that CZ's decocker guns start from half-cock, after they've been de-cocked. Okay. Does this mean that if CZ had decided that they ONLY wanted their guns to be operable from this position, and set the draw bar up to only catch the hammer if it was there, that the trigger WOULD NOT be a double-action any longer?

Or what about HK's "LEM" trigger system? It has a re-strike capability, but not with the same short and light trigger pull that it's intended to use when in "normal operating mode". If it had also been set up without this function, would it suddenly be "not a double action pistol"?

Sorry, but I'll stick by what I've already said: How a gun appears to function, how the trigger pull feels or looks, or what has to be done to get that trigger mechanism into it's primary functioning mode has nothing to do with what's really going on inside the pistol. And the old adage about "looks like a duck, walks like a duck" doesn't mean you aren't dealing with something else, like say... a goose.

Oh, and something I should have added to my response to BluesBear... Take a good look at a HK VP-70, a Sauer Behorden ("Authority") Model 1930, as well as a few of John Browning's pistols, and tell me how much is really "new" in a Glock. I don't know about you, but it looks like a case of several older features, put together in one pistol, to me.


J.C.

Edited again because I keep finding that I've left something out, here and there...

 

[MarquisDS]

Sure Would......

If I didn't have the money for Hemorrhoid Surgery or a Podiatrist....
:banghead:
This is a trick question right.....

 

[Walt Sherrill]

I think it IS the equivalent of a DAO gun. Its also the equivalent of a SA gun -- but Glock would have no reason to push that point.

The Glock is also functionally equivalent to a DAEWOO DP-51 in SA mode, with hammer lowered. The only difference is that the DAEWOO allows a second strike, because its a true SA/DA gun with a hinged hammer.

Jamie C: you keep subtly changing and refining your definitions of the standards or conditions that define an action type. (Now its limited to how the gun works when the gun is in battery -- when I always thought double-action defined the whole process.)

I've not seen YOUR definitions used by anybody but you. Show us some other credible sources who use the same definitions as you do, on the web or elsewhere, and I'll concede the point to you.

 

[Jamie C.]

No Walt, I've not "subtly changed and refined my definitions" at all. I think I've been pretty consistent in saying that it's what the trigger DOES, not what it DOESN'T DO.

And I guess you didn't click on this link when I posted it before.

If you had, you would have seen this:

And also this :

"WIST-94 is a semi-automatic pistol chambered for 9mm Parabellum round. It uses the Browning cam-lug system of operation. The polygonal-rifled barrel is locked to the slide by three locking lugs machined into the upper part of the barrel. The frame is made from polymer plastic while the slide is constructed from steel. The trigger mechanism is similar to the one used in Glock pistols: striker-fired double-action-only (DAO). After racking the slide back and after each shot fired the striker is held semi-cocked allowing for lighter trigger pull than conventional double-action. The only safety used is an internal automatic firing pin safety that unlocks the firing pin only in the final stages of the trigger pull. WIST-94 is fed by a 16 round magazine. The magazine catch is reversible for use by left-handed shooter. Slide release lever is located at the left side of the gun. The sights are fixed and are equipped with tritium inserts for low-light situations. Wist-94L is also equipped with a laser sight mounted in the upper part of trigger guard."

And there is also this article on the Sigma, which uses the same type of system as the Glock: Guns Magazine
It was written by Charlie Petty, a gun writer that's been around quite some time. He makes this comment, in the article "One of the things we weren't anticipating is how hard it is on your trigger finger to shoot a whole bunch of rounds with a DAO trigger of a little over 10 pounds."
Remember, the Sigma has to have the striker re-set by the slide too.

And there's this article on Walther's P99: Walther P99
This comment can be found there : "AS with the Glock, Sigma and most other double action, striker-fired autopistols, there is no manual safety on the P99."

And finally, there's this article:
Choosing the Defensive Handgun
The following comment is made there:
"Glock/Sigma: These are striker-fired and have no external hammer. Carried fully loaded. Fired by simply pulling the trigger. Trigger pull is heavier than SA, lighter than most DAs. No manual safety. (The Glock and Sigma are actually DAOs, although their triggers are partially pre-cocked by movement of the slide. Since they are different enough in feel from other DAs and DAOs, they are often considered a separate type.)"

I expect though, that the last part is all you'll see, Walt, even though Mr. Freburg doesn't say WHO considers them a separate type of system, and whether these people are usually conversant in firearms design or not.
I do find it interesting that he points out that this opinion is based on how the trigger pull feels.


Is this enough for you, or are these sources not "credible" enough for you?



J.C.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

Well.... at least we've gotten this far without throwing rocks at each other. That means we've got two hard-headed adults here, as opposed to two hard-headed kids. <grin>

None of those are explanations of the DEFINITIONS of DAO. They are simply restatements of your position from a different person. Just because they call it a DAO gun doesn't mean its a double-action gun. It could just mean they've got it wrong, too. <grin>

Put simply: just because my "experts" and I call something "X" doesn't mean that it is truly "X" -- it just means we've chosen to call it that. We might be right, or we might just misunderstand what "X" really means. To resolve the matter, we would need a proper generally-accepted definition of "X" so that we can see if it really applies. The same holds true for this discussion.

I asked for authoritative definitions because I said YOUR definitions were suspect -- and subtly changing as we move forward.

In fact, as you note, your "experts" do as much to support MY position as yours -- as indicated by the point you emphasized: "ince they are different enough in feel from other DAs and DAOs, they are often considered a separate type." (Hell, the SIGMA is almost a direct copy -- so of course its nearly the same. That's why Glock took S&W to court over the SIGMA.)

As others have noted, the difference noted above is more than just feel.

In fact, feel isn't really an issue, as far as I'm concerned -- a gun can be made to feel a lot of different ways, and that his little or no bearing on the type of "action" it uses. The fact that it feels different is irrelevant.

But, even that "expert" (and most members of THR would probably NOT consider a gun mag writer an expert) seems to feel the Glock action might be "neither fish nor fowl," too -- the point I originally made, many messages back.

Find some definitions of what traits make a DA(O) gun "DA(O)," and you'll prove your point or disprove mine. A properly thorough definition of DA will suffice.

 

[Bobby Lee]

I've looked around the web and the definitions of DA I've found all say about the same thing, to wit: double action -- a handgun mechanism in which a single pull of the trigger cocks and releases the hammer.

Then according to the definitions of DA you have found on the web a Glock IS a DA.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

A single pull of the Glock trigger does NOT cock the striker. The striker spring must FIRST be partially cocked by slide movement. Once pulled, the trigger will not reset the striker UNTIL the slide moves and partially cocks the striker spring, again. The trigger doesn't do it all.

The difference between the Glock and MOST DA guns, is that with most DA guns the trigger completely cocks and releases the striker or hammer. Over the years, that was MY understanding of a DA or DAO action: the trigger did it all. (Perhaps that's wrong, but I've been unable to find a different description of DA.)

On the other hand, the difference between the Glock and MOST SA guns, is that the SA gun's slide FULLY cocks the striker spring or main spring, and the trigger releases it all. The Glock slide partially loads the spring, while the trigger completes the process and releases it all.

It looks and acts like both a DA gun and a SA gun.

 

[Bobby Lee]

double action -- a handgun mechanism in which a single pull of the trigger cocks and releases the hammer.

When I remove my Glock from it's holster and point it downrange and pull it's trigger, the trigger both cocks and releases the striker firing the round in the chamber.

My Glock is DA.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

Not quite. If you think its truly a double action gun, try dry-fire practice. Tell me pulling the trigger (only) cocks the striker.

If, when you point your gun downrange, you encounter a hard primer -- its been known to happen -- your DA gun suddently turns magically into a SA gun.

Then you must move the slide far enough to preset the striker spring -- or rack the slide and eject the round. That's because pulling the trigger a second time, won't cock the trigger -- unless you've first moved the slide..

With other DA guns you could just pull the trigger again, and it might fire.

(In self-defense situations, I'll agree that its probably best to rack the slide, but at the range, where nothing is at risk, and you might just be punching paper, doing a second trigger pull is acceptable.)

The trigger ALONE doesn't cock the striker spring. The SLIDE'S movement partially cocks it, and the trigger completes the process. If the slide doesn't move, the striker doesn't get cocked at all.

 

[bakert]

head spinning

As a newbie here you all have got my head spinning with a lot of the questions and explanations. Gonna have to read this whole thread again in the morning when I'm more alert. By the way, my carry gun is a Ruger P97 with the hammer down on a loaded rd when in my waistband. Hammer back my -----!:banghead:

 

[Walt Sherrill]

Your P-97 is a true DA/SA gun. It'll work when you pull the trigger. It has a firing pin safety, too, so carrying it hammer down is perfectly safe, as long as you keep your finger off the trigger. The slide doesn't have to move. <grin>

The only thing really still being debated here is the Glock "safe action" trigger -- and its not at all like your P-97's trigger.

 

[Graystar]

It is my understanding that the earliest guns that could fire both with and without first manually cocking the gun actually had two triggers. One trigger could only release the hammer, while the second trigger could only cock and release. A single trigger that could perform the function of either trigger of a double trigger gun, was known as a double action trigger.

Therefore, the most accurate definition of a double action pistol is one in which the trigger can operate in two distinct ways.

As a Glock trigger can only operate in one way, it is more accurate to say it is a single action pistol.

In any case, I think it is foolhardy to carry a gun WITHOUT one in the chamber and either a DA gun or the hammer cocked on a SA gun. If you don’t carry your gun such that you can’t present and fire in an instant, then make sure you carry a heavy gun because all you’re gonna have time for is to hit the BG with it.

 

[Jamie C.]

*sigh* Now why did I know this was gonna happen?

Walt, you said "Show us some other credible sources who use the same definitions as you do, on the web or elsewhere, and I'll concede the point to you."

I did exactly that.
The articles I linked to are by people that use the same definition that I and many other do. If they didn't they wouldn't have made the comments I quoted in my post.

And nowhere in there did I say they were experts, gunsmiths, mechanical designers, or anything of the like. This is solely your doing.
I only pointed out that Charlie was a gun writer that had been around a good while. ( All of us are no doubt aware of how gun writers like to go on ad nauseum about all the little differences in each gun or action type. It's one of their tricks to fill up the space between the ads. ( we laughingly call those spaces "articles or "stories".)) It therefore stands to reason that if a gun is NOT of a certain type, they'll spend a great deal of time telling you the "why and how" of it. They can hardly do this if they haven't made the effort to know, themselves, can they?

And you even go so far as to insist that "It could just mean they've got it wrong, too. ", as if there's no possibility that YOU are the one that's wrong.
This I find to be hysterically funny, and incredibly arrogant. Especially since you haven't posted the first source other than yourself to support your side of the contention.


Oh, and Walt... I myself have a degree in mechanical drafting/design, and worked for more than 16 years in that capacity. I grew up with a father, grandfather, and one uncle that are machinists, and even spent time as a machinist's apprentice ( Decided I liked my fingers well enough to want to keep all of 'em, and chose a slightly different path, after noticing how many folks in the shop were missing digits. ). I've also done quite a bit of gun smithing in the last 25 or 30 years, and worked with and for a local 'smith here, for a couple of years. I've been a shooter for more than 35 years, as well as having been both a soldier and a Sheriff's deputy.

And although I don't consider myself an "expert" at much of anything... I don't believe I need one to tell me whether or not a pistol is double or single action.

Now... I'm quite sure that no matter what "evidence" or "proof" I come up with, you're going to find reason to argue with it.

And that's okay by me. I'll leave the folks that read this to decide for themselves, or to ask any gun smith they choose for their opinion on the subject.

However... ( You knew there was gonna be a "however", didn't ya? ) I stand by what I have said from the very first, and the one thing that you cannot and have not bothered to even try to disprove: That if a gun's trigger acts ONLY to drop the hammer or striker, that it is indeed a single-action... and that if that trigger is involved with both the COCKING and RELEASING of that hammer or striker, that it is a double-action.

And this sir, is the definition of the weapon's trigger or "trigger system", if you will, and nothing more. It doesn't matter what else the gun does or doesn't do, or if it turns into a single-shot, after that first shot is fired.



Oh... and since I got involved with this debate, and never answered the original question, I'll do it now.... Hell no, I will not carry a single-action weapon with the safety off, or a DA/SA "cocked and unlocked".
Doing so is one sure way to invite unwanted holes in things.



J.C.

 

[Kestrel]

I like to carry a pistol cocked and UNLOCKED, after I've had a lot of cold medicine and operating on very little sleep.

Sometimes, I'll let a pistol in this condition slide around on the floorboard of the truck, while I'm driving late at night in a rain storm. Maybe throw a couple of wrenches and some screwdrivers on the floorboard along with it.

I also don't mind leaving a cocked and UNLOCKED pistol in the bottom of a rucksack, on a long, tiring hike. There's usually lots of padding in there, with all the loose matches, open cans of sterno and loose fishhooks.

 

[Bobby Lee]

It seems to me that if one wishes to carry a "cocked" pistol and does not wish to have to bother with a manaul safety that they may forget about if TSHTF then they need to buy a gun designed to be safety carried in this condition.

Such a gun is the Springfield XD.

100% single action and no manaul safety for one to forget about under stress.

Or I guess there could be someone here that could assume the XD is not SA but their opinion does not change the facts.

 

[Walt Sherrill]

Bobby Lee: IDPA considers it SA, too, much to the frustration of many shooters who bought them thinking they were buying Stock Service Pistols. (By IDPA calling it a SA, that forces them into the the "tougher" Enhanced Service Pistol division.)

Jamie C: I have from the first asked for credible sources or accepted definitions. You've offered neither.

The only definitions you've offered keep getting enhanced: the first one said the trigger "completed cocking the striker spring," then was later enhanced to say the defnition only applied to how the gun operated when it was battery, or words to that effect.

I don't think I'm being too unreasonable. Give us a credible definition of DA or DAO from a credible source -- not a home-made definition that you continue to modify as you go.

You cited two writers, and one of those conceded that some folks don't consider the Glock to be a standard DA or DAO gun. How about some definitions from gun books or technical websites, about what constitutes a DA or DAO gun? I'm really not asking for a lot. The definitions I've found are much less obtuse than the ones you've been citing.

Wikipedia, a fairly credible source says the following: "The term double action was originally applied to revolvers. In the 19th century revolvers were often classified as to how their hammers were cocked. They were either "thumb-cocked", in which the hammer had to be cocked for each shot by the thumb, or "trigger-cocked", in which a long pull on the trigger first cocked the hammer and then released it to fall and fire the weapon."

Another source says "double-action" originally meant the gun could be thumb cocked or trigger cocked, hence the "double" action.

A trigger pull, alone, doesn't do that with the Glock, as an attempt to dry fire it will show. The slide has to be moved, just like a striker-fired SA gun (such as the Luger.)

A GLOSSARY OF FIREARMS TERMINOLOGY on the web, [link]http://www.building-tux.com/dsmjd/tech/glossary.htm [/link] says that a double action gun is one in which pulling the trigger both cocks the hammer and releases it. It doesn't say the term only applies when the gun is loaded: it describes how the hammer (or striker) works.

Even the Fjestad Blue Book's glossary describes DOUBLE ACTION as a weapon where the hammer can be cocked and dropped by a single pull of the trigger. (It goes on to note tha most DA guns are really DA/SA guns, with subsequent shots having the hammer [striker] cocked by the slide -- with slide cocking making that part of the "action" SA.) It also says that A DAO gun is not cocked by the slide, but only by the trigger.

Got a better set of definitions?