Why does safety location on Beretta 92 make a difference?

[someguy2800]

I generally prefer pistols with safety features built into the fire control group rather than manual safety’s. I especially dislike slide mounted safety’s just because the 1911 safety location and direction is natural for me from years of shooting 1911’s and buckmarks. If I have to push the safety forward and up with my thumb to fire it’s completely unnatural to me because my brain says up is safe. I would just as rather throw any gun so equiped in the garbage. It also totally bewilders me why anyone would want both a safety and a decocker. I like the CZ 75bd deckocker which is frame mounted and controls the hammer as you release it. And it doesn’t function as a safety.

 

[AustinTX]

More guns use the 1911 style frame mounted safety than use the S&W style (from the old DA/SA S&W autos) safety/decocker on the slide.

Or, more appropriately, Walther-style.

 

[JTQ]

It also totally bewilders me why anyone would want both a safety and a decocker.

The decocker is the primary use of the lever, especially when the gun is on your person.

The safety is for when you don't have control of the gun, be it in a backpack, in a drawer, or when transferring it between shooters, etc.

 

[lysanderxiii]

I was, and still am a fan of the double action revolver, so I don't feel the need for a mechanical safety lever, as long as the drop safety works. The classic DA/SA slide decocker-safety, works fine. Load, chamber, point in a safe direction, decock, place safety in fire, holster, now you're ready.

Walther PP, P-38, Beretta M9, Sauer 38h, S&W 39/59/69, IMI 941RS, etc, work just fine, and it really does take that much practice to master the change in trigger pull between the first and second round.

 

[Tallball]

I have a Taurus 99 and a Beretta 96.

I like a frame mounted safety WAY better than a slide mounted safety. Having it on the slide seems to make it easier to bump into things, and I don't like racking the slide with a safety in the way.

 

[FL-NC]

1- hard to reach 2- very easy to accidentally engage in a malfunction drill

 

[Shawn Dodson]

I carried a 96FS on police patrol (the .40 S&W version of the 92). I was not a fan of the slide mounted hammer-drop safety for these reasons:

• I carried the pistol with the manual safety engaged:
  • In case I got into a physical scuffle and the pistol got snatched from my holster. There are many documented cases in which having the manual safety engaged kept cops from being shot with their own pistols.
  • If it has a manual safety, then I carry it with the manual safety engaged and I train to disengage it during my drawstroke. Murphy’s Law dictates that if I carry the pistol with the manual safety disengaged, then I’ll expect it to always be disengaged; however, the one time I'll draw the pistol in an actual emergency to save my life then the manual safety will be unexpectedly engaged, and it won’t fire when I press the trigger.
• It required me to shift my firing grip during my draw stroke to disengage it.
• I had to be extra careful when snapping the thumb snap on my holster (Safariland SSIII 0705) to ensure it didn't inadvertently move the manual safety to the disengaged position.
• I had to develop a method of disengaging the manual safety during my drawstroke that was not sensitive to the position of the manual safety. I had programmed myself that the manual safety would always be engaged, but if it was inadvertently disengaged, then I'd detect that "something wasn't right" during my drawstroke and it would slow me down. The technique I developed was to slide the thumb of my firing hand across the top edge of the grip panel. I keyed off the feel of my thumb against the edge grip panel instead of the feel of the manual safety lever.
  
• I had to incorporate an extra step in the "tap/rack" immediate action to make it "tap/rack/safety" in case the manual safety moved to the engaged position during "rack".

 

[JTQ]

I carried a 96FS on police patrol ...

Would you mind listing the other handguns you carried during your career on police patrol?

 

[TransAmConvert]

For Shawn Dodson,
Several well considered points there.
Do you feel that a 'G' model with the spring loaded decocker only would address all your named issues or would you still have preferred a frame safety?

 

[Mosin77]

Comparing a frame mounted (Taurus) and slide mounted (Beretta) version of the same design, the Taurus seems easier and more intuitive to operate, at least for me, coming from a 1911. It may be different for someone with bigger hands or who came from an older Smith. Frame-mounted is also less likely to be accidentally engaged when racking the slide, which is something that can and does happen with slide-mounted safeties. Rack to chamber a round, or clear a malfunction, and dead trigger. Under stress it may not be immediately obvious what’s going wrong, which could be very bad indeed when seconds count.

I don’t like safeties on DA/SA guns, but if I must have one I’d rather it be on the frame.

Edited to add: The slide-mounted safety is also, frankly speaking, uncomfortable. It’s not pleasant to rack. This isn’t much of a deal-breaker in the real world where you’re not gratuitously racking your slide many times a day but it’s certainly a factor in overall appreciation for a platform or lack thereof. I don’t like my PPK’s slide mounted safety any better than a Beretta’s.

 

[Slamfire]

This is true, but it's enough for me, and I feel comfortable with a 1911 that's 'cocked and locked", but many people are not these days.

As long as you understand how the mechanism really works then you accept the risk, and that does not bother me. It bothers me when Cult Cocked and Locked spreads misinformation, and people follow the advice that the mechanism is perfectly safe when cocked and locked, when it is not. The misinformed are more likely to get hurt because they don't know better. Maybe they have an open top holster that allows the pistol to fall out on the hammer, which could shear the sear surface on the hammer, or break the hammer.

I found a post of a man who carried a 1911 in a fanny pack, and the safety bumped off, the close confines of the fanny pack pressed against the grip safety, and something tripped the trigger. Of all things, the man contacted his nephew before he died from the discharge. No doubt he had been informed that it was perfectly safe to carry a 1911 cocked and locked. Well it is certainly less safe to carry cocked an locked out of a holster, because the safety can be bumped, and something can snag the trigger. I also consider cocked and locked carry in open holsters risky as there needs to be a strap between the hammer and slide. Just in case something hits the hammer.

The safest way to carry a 1911 is nothing in the chamber, magazine in pistol. It sure is the slowest to get into action though. This mode eliminates the potential of an accidental discharge due to firing pin inertia if the 1911 falls on its muzzle. The gunsmith Drake dropped a 1911 from numerous heights on its muzzle, and the pistol would go bang. If someone has to carry a 1911 with a round in the chamber, then I agree with General Hatcher who said the 1911 is safest with the hammer down. But, as he said, you have to be very careful about lowering the hammer. Gen Hatcher (at the time he wrote this he was a Major) said to use two hands to lower the hammer, but did not describe the procedure. I think his procedure was to pinch the hammer between the thumb and forefinger of the non shooting hand, and release the trigger with the shooting hand. Of course, the trigger should be released instantly after sear release, so just in case the hammer slips, it may be caught by the half cock. Once the hammer is on the half cock, lift hammer enough to clear the sear, press trigger, and slowly lower down again.

Once the hammer is down on a 1911 it is very hard to have an accidental discharge excluding a long drop on its muzzle.

 

[someguy2800]

The decocker is the primary use of the lever, especially when the gun is on your person.

The safety is for when you don't have control of the gun, be it in a backpack, in a drawer, or when transferring it between shooters, etc.

I feel no need to have an additional safety in any of those situations. That's the whole point of decocking it. If you like it then I am happy for you.

 

[someguy2800]

As long as you understand how the mechanism really works then you accept the risk, and that does not bother me. It bothers me when Cult Cocked and Locked spreads misinformation, and people follow the advice that the mechanism is perfectly safe when cocked and locked, when it is not. The misinformed are more likely to get hurt because they don't know better. Maybe they have an open top holster that allows the pistol to fall out on the hammer, which could shear the sear surface on the hammer, or break the hammer.

I found a post of a man who carried a 1911 in a fanny pack, and the safety bumped off, the close confines of the fanny pack pressed against the grip safety, and something tripped the trigger. Of all things, the man contacted his nephew before he died from the discharge. No doubt he had been informed that it was perfectly safe to carry a 1911 cocked and locked. Well it is certainly less safe to carry cocked an locked out of a holster, because the safety can be bumped, and something can snag the trigger. I also consider cocked and locked carry in open holsters risky as there needs to be a strap between the hammer and slide. Just in case something hits the hammer.

The safest way to carry a 1911 is nothing in the chamber, magazine in pistol. It sure is the slowest to get into action though. This mode eliminates the potential of an accidental discharge due to firing pin inertia if the 1911 falls on its muzzle. The gunsmith Drake dropped a 1911 from numerous heights on its muzzle, and the pistol would go bang. If someone has to carry a 1911 with a round in the chamber, then I agree with General Hatcher who said the 1911 is safest with the hammer down. But, as he said, you have to be very careful about lowering the hammer. Gen Hatcher (at the time he wrote this he was a Major) said to use two hands to lower the hammer, but did not describe the procedure. I think his procedure was to pinch the hammer between the thumb and forefinger of the non shooting hand, and release the trigger with the shooting hand. Of course, the trigger should be released instantly after sear release, so just in case the hammer slips, it may be caught by the half cock. Once the hammer is on the half cock, lift hammer enough to clear the sear, press trigger, and slowly lower down again.

Once the hammer is down on a 1911 it is very hard to have an accidental discharge excluding a long drop on its muzzle.

I feel safe carrying cocked an locked with a 1911 assuming that I have a holster that properly secures the pistol from falling out if I take a tumble and protects the trigger. Carrying a cocked and locked 1911 in a fanny pack with no holster or in wasteband with no holster like I have seen some do is insane to me. To me the holster is the most critical safety item assuming a pistol is properly designed to be drop safe. I really don't put much faith in external manual safeties because they are so often bumped on or off when I am working on stuff, especially anything with an ambidextrous safety. I occasionally still carry a 1911 or Star for nostalgia, but of my other carry guns, the only one that has a safety is my SR9 and SR40. On both of those I put the safety on when putting it in the holster, and then click it off before buckling my thumb strap. Honestly I would remove those all together but they are small and snag free enough that they don't get inadvertently flipped on.

 

[Slamfire]

I feel safe carrying cocked an locked with a 1911 assuming that I have a holster that properly secures the pistol from falling out if I take a tumble and protects the trigger. Carrying a cocked and locked 1911 in a fanny pack with no holster or in wasteband with no holster like I have seen some do is insane to me.

Absolutely insane, but then, these people have been receiving dangerous advice since the end of WW2 from hyper ventilating Cocked and Locked Cultists who are fanatical about the 1911 being perfect safe if carried cocked and locked. I was one of those ignorant owners of a 1911, and it took time, and I had to learn from others, just how wrong Cult Cocked and Locked is about the 1911 mechanism, the whole history of the 1911, and how the Army originally planned to holster the things. Which was round in the chamber, hammer down. It was never designed to be "carried" cocked and locked. The safety was a temporary measure till the Cavalry trooper could calm his horse, gain control of his situation, and lower the hammer to the safety position, and holster the pistol.

To me the holster is the most critical safety item assuming a pistol is properly designed to be drop safe. I really don't put much faith in external manual safeties because they are so often bumped on or off when I am working on stuff, especially anything with an ambidextrous safety. I occasionally still carry a 1911 or Star for nostalgia, but of my other carry guns, the only one that has a safety is my SR9 and SR40. On both of those I put the safety on when putting it in the holster, and then click it off before buckling my thumb strap. Honestly I would remove those all together but they are small and snag free enough that they don't get inadvertently flipped on.

I know the shooting community philosophy is now "gun safe in holster". There was a time when the community thought a gun should be "safe by itself". I want a firearm to be safe by itself, not be safe only when it is in something, on top of something, surrounded by something, etc, etc. Transferring the safety function to something other than the firearm means the firearm is not safe when the something fails. Which happens, striker fired pistols have discharged when leather holsters wore, and pressed against the trigger. Also, the current crop of striker fired pistol will discharge during holstering if a shirt tail, or some other thing, wraps around the trigger mechanism. That type of pistol is prone to discharge at the moment of holstering, which I consider too risky for me. I would like a pistol that is safe before holstering, during holstering, and after holstering. Or, safe outside of a holster.

I also believe, I am not going to win any quick draw contest as the bad guy will always have the drop, and the initiative. I don't believe I will survive any lethal encounter unless I also have the luck of time to recognize the threat and the space to prepare for it. Neither of these are a given. All the combat games I used to play started with a timer, with me ready to go at the beep! How wonderful, crime starts predictably with a warning beep. Since those days, I have become more concerned about those quick draw guns shooting me, instead of some boogie man.

 

[Kawamax]

There are a lot of interesting and insightful comments in this thread. I personally prefer a frame mounted safety. So for example when I got my CZ P01 omega the first thing I did was remove the de-cocker and put in the safety.

But that’s me and what I am comfortable with. If you prefer a de-cocker, or a glock type trigger safety it’s all good.

 

[film495]

I also believe, I am not going to win any quick draw contest as the bad guy will always have the drop, and the initiative. I don't believe I will survive any lethal encounter unless I also have the luck of time to recognize the threat and the space to prepare for it. Neither of these are a given. All the combat games I used to play started with a timer, with me ready to go at the beep! How wonderful, crime starts predictably with a warning beep. Since those days, I have become more concerned about those quick draw guns shooting me, instead of some boogie man.

can't agree more

 

[Old Dog]

I spent quite a few years actually carrying an M9 while on active duty, not simply just annual handgun quals or when on watch, but as a daily duty pistol and also while deployed to some bad places.

I guess we were all blissfully ignorant that Beretta screwed up the pistol by placing the safety/decocker on the slide. Sure, those of us that came up on 1911s would gripe occasionally, but for the most part, everybody just adapted. Never saw anybody sweat too much if they inadvertently placed the pistol on safe doing a tap-rack-bang malfunction clearance, which I only ever saw during training/quals. Never knew this was considered a huge problem until I saw Vickers waste a half hour of my life explaining this on one of the outdoor channels gun TV shows.

The simple fact remains that the M9/92FS pistol is still one of the most reliable handguns every produced (with quality magazines and proper maintenance). Law enforcement common issue, pre-poly framed striker fired era, was S&W pistols (through 3rd gen). Many European cops and military used Walther pistols for a lot of years. These folks learned to deal with the slide-mounted safety.

Mas Ayoob documented some years back a number of incidents in which cops' lives were saved when their pistols were taken away because the bad guys couldn't immediately figure out how to get the pistols off safe.

My takeaway on all this is to simply learn and be aware of the features and operating protocol for whatever firearm you are carrying or shooting at the time. I guess I fall in Langdon's camp on the Beretta. More pros than cons, just learn your pistol and it's a non-issue for most.

I suspect that the Beretta safety "controversy" is mostly stoked by the die-hard 1911 true believers and acolytes of John Moses Browning, who believe any system other than a frame-mounted safety is utter heresy. Same folks that shudder at the prospect of carrying a plastic striker fired pistol in Condition 1 with... the horror!... no manual safety at all.

 

[halfmoonclip]

The M9 shares quite a lot with Walthers. Even the PPK has a decocker that works the same way (up is fire), and the Beretta takes quite a lot from the P38, including the locking block and decocking mechanism.
Inadvertent safety engagement, while manipulating the slide, is considered the major issue with the Beretta decocker safety. Some later iterations have a 'decock only' function, with the safety popping back to 'fire' under spring load.
Moon

 

[JTQ]

I suspect that the Beretta safety "controversy" is mostly stoked by the die-hard 1911 true believers and acolytes of John Moses Browning, who believe any system other than a frame-mounted safety is utter heresy.

I'm sure there are quite a few "die-hard 1911" folks that complain about the "backwards" safety on the M9/92FS, but I get the feeling most of these complaints about the Beretta safety/decocker are actually from striker fired folk that wouldn't carry a gun with a manual safety because it will get them "killed on the streets". Most of these folks couldn't operate a manual safety if it switched either up or down for safe.

They often won't comment in a 1911 thread about the 1911 safety since they don't think the 1911 is the equal of their striker gun of choice so there is no point commenting, but since the Beretta M9/92FS is still the equal of striker fired gun X, they'll need to find some problem with the Beretta to ensure their striker fired gun is still the right choice.

An observation I often have is a Beretta M9/92FS thread usually can't get more than three or four posts in before somebody will complain about the "backwards" safety. On the other hand a thread on a Ruger P85/P89/P95/P97/P345 or S&W 39/59/645/1006/4506/etc. may go through several pages of comments and the exact same safety/decocker device used by Beretta, Ruger, and S&W never gets mentioned.

I think this is just like the lack of comments regarding the 1911 safety, the Ruger's and S&W TDA guns since they have all been discontinued, they are not competitive with the current striker guns, and there is no need to denigrate those "quaint relics" that they are. The Beretta M9/92FS is still available, and competitive, and must be defeated.

 

[Jim Watson]

Many European cops and military used Walther pistols for a lot of years. These folks learned to deal with the slide-mounted safety.

Jan Stevenson once did a piece expanding Cooper's Conditions of Readiness, mostly humorous. I think there was a lot of nonsense inserted to make it come out to the then German police policy:
A Walther PP .32, chamber empty, hammer down, safety engaged, in a flap holster with the flap buttoned down.
Condition 13.

In the 1970s, the German police up gunned to 9mm P in response to terrorism and crime by the Baader Meinhof Gang and the Red Army Brigade. None of the approved pistoles, not even the Walther, have a slide safety. Hmm.

The Beretta Model 92G with decock only function for the slide lever was introduced to meet French gendarme specifications.

 

[mavracer]

John Moses Browning (PBUH) put the safety right where deity (and the US Cavalry) ordained it, and set it up so that closing your hand onto the pistol naturally switches to Fire. Moving it seems a bit irreligious, and turning it upside down so that an outward, opening motion of the thumb is required, is just heretical.

That's it for me.
And why I prefer decocker only pistols like Sig for DA/SA guns or frame mount like CZ75 and wouldn't buy a Ruger SR22 even though I really like everything else it's frame mounted safety works backward.

 

[Zaydok Allen]

My preference is for shooting CZ pistols, and 1911s. On both the safety is pulled down to shoot, and I use it as either a thumb shelf or index point. To me, flipping a lever up is less in line with my other guns, and on the slide, it is in a harder to reach location.

My Sig with a decocker doesn't come into play, nor does my striker fired guns, in this conversation.

I also happen to have two SAO Sigs with safetey levers that get pulled down to deactivate and shoot.

So for me it's all abotu ease of manipulation, but more importantly, consistency of operation between guns. It leads to a faster first shot for me.

That being said, if you are used to shooting Berettas, it's not exactly a problem in my opinion.

 

[d31tc]

On my 92F and 92X, I practice swiping down with my thumb to switch the safety to fire. My thumb is long enough to do this and it pushes the lever far enough to disengage, so it is the same motion as with my other pistols with manual safeties. It works for me.

That said, I don't carry my Berettas or 1911's, but they are accessible in my home.

 

[AlexanderA]

My problem with the Beretta 92 is not the location of the safety, but the fact that engaging the safety automatically drops the hammer. This is unnerving to me. So I removed the hammer release levers on both my Berettas (replacing them with spacers from the "D" version). Now, with the safety on, the hammer remains cocked. (In that condition, you can decock safely simply by pulling the trigger.)

The next step has been to get the Taurus PT92, which has a frame-mounted safety and can be carried "cocked and locked." In other respects it's a near-duplicate of the Beretta.

 

[Shivahasagun]

All 92's should be "G" style.

Decock only, no manual safety.

You can buy one that way or buy a $55 kit from Beretta to retro it from FS to G.

I've done both.