What's the point of "safe action" triggers?

[Restorer]

Ok, before I get hammered here, I tried the search function for an answer but I couldn't find my question addressed specifically (maybe I didn't use the right search terms). I'm cognizant of the different types of actions and I own SA, DA/SA and striker-fired weapons so I'm not a total newbie. I've had or currently own a WWII Browning P-35, a Colt 1911 (not A1), a S&W 36, a Walther P-22, a CZ-97 and a Smith & Wesson M&P Compact.

My question: all other factors being equal, why should I purchase a weapon with a "safe" trigger (a la Glock 'safe action' or other lever/articulated trigger types) instead of a DAO or LDA trigger?

I've shot Glocks and...hate to say it, y'all...don't like 'em. Different strokes, ya know.We own an M&P, and it seems that it's safety is conceptually based on the same premise as the Glock...it won't fire unless you pull the trigger.

Huh? That's true of almost all modern handguns, isn't it? By one means or another, they've been made drop-safe? Assuming everything is in proper repair on ANY gun it shouldn't fire until you pull the trigger.

What's "safe" about that trigger? I see posts here dealing with ADs with safe action (generic term here) guns caused by a trigger being accidentally pulled by keys, shirt tails, all sorts of stuff. Anything that can cause an AD on a revolver can cause an AD on a "safe" trigger. The only thing "safe" I see is maybe making the manufacturer safe against some lawsuits.

In my experience, the trigger pull on guns with doodads on the trigger is lighter than the pull of most DAO guns. It seems to me an AD would be more,not less, likely with the safe action trigger.

Before the hammering starts, I know that the only effective safety is between my ears. I also know that Mr. Murphy is alive and well and he has an affinity for unnecessarily complicated widgets. I'm obviously missing something or they wouldn't sell so many of the things.

Ok, let the hammering begin.

 

[19-3Ben]

I actually agree 100%. I fail to see the point. I'm looking at my M&P right now. Just about anything that will snag on the trigger would pull it. the safe-action thingy would only work on something that slid all the way up the trigger and tried to pull it from the point where it meets with the frame. How likely is that to happen? If something yanks the trigger the gun will go off, doodad or no doodad.

Silliness. Same with XDs and Glocks.

 

[RNB65]

It's a drop safety thing. I believe that Glock discovered in testing that if a DAO gun strikes the ground with enough force (such as being slammed onto a hard surface or dropped from a great height) and at just the right angle, the force of impact could depress the trigger and cause it to discharge. The little "safe-action" bar locks the trigger and prevents it from moving unless the safe-action bar is depressed first. Because the safe-action bar and the trigger move at different angles relative to each other, there's no way a hard impact can depress both simultaneously and trigger an AD.

It's not intended to offer any protection against an object (finger, key, thumbstrap, etc.) entering the trigger guard and depressing the trigger. Keep your finger off the trigger and the trigger covered by a proper holster and you'll have no problems.

 

[chipperi]

I believe the term "Safe Action" is proprietary of Glock. The safe action consists of 3 safeties. The first being the nub on the trigger, the second is the striker (firing pin) is always resting on a block in the forward position until the trigger is pulled, third the block does not move out of the way until the the trigger reaches the point at which it lets the striker go.

 

[Ridgerunner665]

chipperi,
Good expalnation...

That said...I don't see the point in the "safe action" triggers either...I hate the feel of them. Too many years pulling single action 1911 triggers I guess.

BTW, I'm right down the road from you...bout 15 miles.

 

[Magnus1959]

I'm happy as all get out with my choice of guns. If I don't like them, I don't buy them. I don't get people who need to validate their purchase by slamming a particular brand ever so stealthily on a forum. Glock seems to get the brunt of it but the same goes for the 1911 haters etc:banghead:

 

[Disaster]

It's a drop safety thing. I believe that Glock discovered in testing that if a DAO gun strikes the ground with enough force (such as being slammed onto a hard surface or dropped from a great height) and at just the right angle, the force of impact could depress the trigger and cause it to discharge. The little "safe-action" bar locks the trigger and prevents it from moving unless the safe-action bar is depressed first. Because the safe-action bar and the trigger move at different angles relative to each other, there's no way a hard impact can depress both simultaneously and trigger an AD.

Good explanation. One clarifying point. The physics of how the safety works is a little different and not based on angles, but inertia. The little safety tab on a Glock (or Steyr), or the trigger tip on a S&W, doesn't have enough mass to push the spring no matter how high you drop it from. Without the tab or trigger tip depressed, the trigger is blocked so it can't move forward and release the sear.

 

[Redlg155]

I would seriously doublt that even without the "safety tab", the Glock or similar plastic trigger would have enough weight to generate enough inertia to overcome the 5+ pounds of trigger pull weight if dropped from a substantial height.

More likely than not, the trigger safety tab is just another measure to make the user feel a bit more comfortable due to the absence of a conventional safety. The relatively short trigger pull when compared to a DAO type weapon does not inspire a lot of confidence without some sort of safety added. In the case of GLock and others, it is a trigger safety. In fact, S&W has introduced a version their M&P .45 with the addition of a conventional thumb activated safety.

One sample scenario. You are holstering your concealed carry weapon and your shirt tail gets trapped in the trigger guard while you are holstering. Will the weapon discharge? Quite possibly. If I'm not mistaken, I've read somewhere that this actually happened.

Don't get me wrong, this same thing could possibly happen with my newly aquired HK P2000sk with the v2 lem trigger, further reinforcing the fact that user awareness and safety is more important than any safety ever devised.

So..are they effective? Sure. I'm relatively certain that this trigger has prevented an accidental discharge (or ND) before, but I believe that they are more for user comfort and to perhaps legal protection than anything else.

 

[Crazy Fingers]

I fail to see the point in the trigger safety as well. I like a real safety that protects against accidental pulling of the trigger too.

 

[jocko]

If your really apprehensive about the safe action system or most of all the defense made ccw guns without external safety's, then carry without one in the pipe. You will be safe for sure, and so will the BG. CCW guns are definitely not for everyone. My kahr PM9 has no external safety, that is one reason I bought it, It rides in my front pocket in a hidden holsters set up. I don;'t clutter that pocket with anything except that handgun. Common sense just dictates some things that are quite obvious.

No one on here wants anyone to get hurt carrying a gun to defend himself. Not good for you, certainly not good when the newspapers pick up on it. If in doubt, don't carry, if still in doubt look for the gun with the safety's that your require. They are out there. then just shoot it like you stole it..

 

[MarshallDodge]

What did I learn in hunter safety many years ago? Never trust a safety, it is a mechanical device that can fail, so treat your gun accordingly.

With that being said, I do feel more comfortable carrying my 1911 cocked and locked knowing that if the thumb safety fails then the grip safety is there as a backup. I use a good holster to make sure that the gun will not fall out.

There are times when I need something smaller so I carry my Kahr in a holster with a trigger guard and I am careful when I holster it.

 

[MICHAEL T]

GM and Ford are going to start putting the acellerator pedal on the brake pedal in newer models . less accidents is their reasoning also...

 

[Gordon Fink]

A safe-action pistol can have a lighter and shorter trigger pull than a traditional double-action handgun because it is partially cocked by the slide cycle upon loading or firing. It is safer than a traditional single-action pistol, because even if the fire-control components spontaneously fail and allow the striker to move forward, it will not have enough energy to ignite the primer. In this respect, safe-action pistols fill a niche between double-action and single-action guns that makes them ideally suited for police service and similar duties.

~G. Fink

 

[Tirod]

Another perspective is that a "safe-action" system allows a firer to not have to manipulate a separate safety lever with some other appendage. Plus, said lever is usually in a more exposed position which can allow it to be accidentally moved to the fire position.

1911 or Beretta, I've found them off - and I know I safed it when I holstered. I don't trust them one bit, and don't need the extra manipulation.

Which raises a question: a new accessory for Glocks is a safety button for the trigger that locks the finger tab. Is that an improvement?

 

[Jim K]

The length or weight of the trigger pull or the partially cocked concept is really irrelevant to the so-called "safe trigger." The latter does not depend on the former or vice versa.

I also fail to see the point. To me, the purpose of a safety is to prevent the gun from firing if/when the trigger is pulled unintentionally. The "safe trigger" does not do that, except under very narrow conditions.

Jim

 

[varoadking]

I've shot Glocks and...hate to say it, y'all...don't like 'em.

It's not unusual for a new shooter like yourself to feel this way...

Like Scotch, for some, it is an acquired taste...

 

[gudel]

does everything need to have a point?
why put a locked in a cocked? what, it's not safe enough, that you admit a flaw by putting a locked in it? Come on people.
Another hate thread.

 

[Restorer]

......I'm happy as all get out with my choice of guns. If I don't like them, I don't buy them. I don't get people who need to validate their purchase by slamming a particular brand ever so stealthily on a forum. Glock seems to get the brunt of it but the same goes for the 1911 haters etc

If I felt the need to validate a purchase or conduct guerilla marketing for a Glock competitor I wouldn't skulk around a forum. In one sentence I stated a preference.."I don't like Glock"...not to be argumentative but to show that I have evaluated a product and rejected it.
Ok, Ok, if it makes the Glocksters feel better..."All hail Glock, All hail Glock, We bow down to thee almighty Glock." Can we move past this now? I'm not picking on any one brand.
If you read again I used "safe action" as a catch-all for that whole trigger genre. I bought my M&P without the safety trigger being a purchase consideration...I like the gun, but I treat it like a light-action DAO.
I'm keeping an open mind and I'm trying to get past marketing hype to create a "warm fuzzy" by using a term like "safe action."

What I want to know is....oh, never mind. Archimedes said "Give me a place to stand and I can move the Earth", referring to the use of levers and fulcrums. I say "Give me a simple topic and I will contort it" referring to my use of word-shovels to dig myself in too deep for logical extraction. I think I'm trying to cut through marketing philosophy (an oxymoron,maybe) and that is surely a fool's errand. Tailor made for me, huh?

 

[Tirod]

I agree - safeties block the action from inadvertent trigger pulling. If they are on.

Operator error in handling a firearm, ignoring the four rules, not being familiar with it's operation, and in general not having adequate training, education, or DNA, may cause someone to pull the trigger on a loaded firearm when they really didn't want to.

But is it really a safety, or is it an exercise in liability avoidance? I believe the safe-action mechanism puts the emphasis on "Where was your finger?" rather than "The darn safety WAS on!"

One of the two students who failed the local CCW course (out of 1,100 so far) did so because they consistently adjusted their hearing protection with a firearm in their hand and a finger on the trigger.

Maybe it's not about where the little lever is, but about safe handling discipline. The safe-action mechanism promotes the latter.

Vee haf ways of making you responsible, yes?

 

[jocko]

tirod

the siderlock (button safety on the glock triggers) is only an imporvement if you want a true safety on ur glock. Otherwise definitely not needed. My personal feelings is that it is a very well made accessory and does what it is suppoed to do. I like my G19 the way it is, but I installed in on my sons G19 as he is new to shooting and I just felt better knowing it was on there. One does not have to utilize it at all either. Nice thing about the siderlock..The oversize slide release lever ont he glocks is a darn nice accessory also, Most never need it though.

 

[weisse52]

OP

I agee with your orginal post.

I also agree with your response.


Just like in the real world "Tupperware" followers are touchy!

 

[SureThing]

Somebody needs to close this thead.

 

[Magnus1959]

Ok, Ok, if it makes the Glocksters feel better..."All hail Glock, All hail Glock, We bow down to thee almighty Glock."

Just like in the real world "Tupperware" followers are touchy!

Carefull, your showing your true colors guys.

 

[weisse52]

Somebody needs to close this thead.

Just curious, why?

 

[ZeSpectre]

The point to Glock "safe action"?
Well, when it came out it was a pretty revolutionary idea and different sells. Now Glock itself is "old news" since it's approaching "venerable age".